Penal Laws not being for the future to be drawn either into Consequence or Example caused the Original Declaration under the Great Seal to be cancelled in his presence whereof Himself and several other Lords of the Council were Witnesses The Record of which in the Journal was then read Then his present Majesty's Speech on Novemb 9. 1685 to both Houses was read wherein declaring the Necessity of his Standing Army and requiring a Supply for their Maintenance he says Let no Man take Exception that there are some Officers in the Army not qualified according to the late Tests I will neither expose them to disgrace nor my self to the want of them if there should be another Rebellion to make them necessary to me The Commons Journal being then turned to their Address to the King was then read Wherein after they had thanked him for his Care in the suppressing the late Rebellion they acquaint him that they had considered his Speech and as to that part of it relating to the Officers They do out of their bounden Duty humbly represent to him That those Officers cannot by Law be capable of their Imployments and that the Incapacities they bring upon themselves thereby can no ways be taken off but by Act of Parliament That therefore they are preparing a Bill to indemnify them from the Penalties they have now incurred And because the continuance of them in their Imployments may be taken to be a dispensing with that Law without Act of Parliament the Consequence of which is of the greatest Concern to the Rights of all his Majesty's Subjects and to all the Laws made for the Security of their Religion They therefore do beseech him he would be graciously pleased to give such Directions therein that no Apprehensions or Jealousies may remain in the Hearts of his Subjects After this that forecited Clause of the Statute 1. Eliz. was read and then Mr. Serj. Levinz spoke to this effect That the Charge being for a Libel it ought to be consider'd Whether the Bishops did deliver this Paper to the King of which there has been no direct Proof Publishing he would not talk of because there has been no proof of a Publication or supposing they did deliver it Whether this be a Libel upon the Matter of it the Manner delivering it or the Persons that did it He said it was no Libel taking notice of the disingenuity offered the Bishops in only setting forth part and not the whole Affirming that the Subjects have a Right to Petitioning in all their Grievances That this was a Grievance the Bishops petitioned against it being what the Law neither Common nor Act of Parliament allowed of And therefore the Bishops could not be guilty of the Charge Then Mr. Finch spoke briefly again making a Challenge to shew any one Instance of such a Declaration such a general Dispensation of Laws from the Conquest till 1672. Leaving their Cause upon this Point That to suspend Laws is to abrogate them and that to abrogate Laws is part of the Legislature which Power is lodged in King Lords and Commons To which Sir Robert Sawyer added That he found few Attempts of this Nature in any Kings Reign In the Reign of Henry the 4th there was an Act of Parliament that Foreigners should have a free Trade in London notwithstanding the Franchises of the City After the Parliament rose the King issued out his Proclamation forbidding the execution of that Law and commanding that it should be in suspense till the next Parliament yet that was held to be against Law Then he mentioned another Case upon the Statute of 31. Hen. 8. cap. 8. which enables the King by Proclamation in many Cases to create the Law which Statute was repealed by 1. Edw. 6. cap. 12. That very Act reciting that the Law is not to be altered or restrained but by Act of Parliament Then Mr. Sommers of Counsel also for the Bishops mentioned the Case of Thomas and Sorrel upon the Validity of a Dispensation of the Statute of Edward the 6th touching selling of Wine Where it was the Opinion of every one of the Judges and they did lay it down as a settled Position that there never could be a Suspension of an Act of Parliament but by the Legislative Power Affirming that the Matters of Fact alledged in the Bishops Petition had been proved perfectly true by the Journals of both Houses That there could be no Design thereby to diminish the King's Prerogative because he had none such That the Petition could not be Seditious nor stir up Sedition because it was presented to the King in private and alone False it could not be because the Matter of it is True There could be nothing of Malice because the Occasion was not sought the Thing was pressed upon them and a Libel it could not be because the Intent was innocent and they kept within the Bounds set by the Act of Parliament that gives the Subject leave to petition his Prince when he is grieved Here the Bishops Counsel saying they had done Mr. Attorn Gen. spoke for the King Alledging that the Records produced were nothing to the purpose because they were only Matters transacted in Parliament and not Acts of Parliament That be their Libel never so true yet still it was Libellous That though the Subject may petition the King yet not in such reflecting Terms And though Religion was concerned yet ought not illegal Means he made use of That therefore the Bishops ought rather to have acquiesced under their Passive Obedience till the Parliament met which the King had promised in his Declaration should be in November Then Mr. Sol. Gen. in along Speech added That the Bishops had no right of Petitioning out of Parliament and therefore the Proceedings in Parliament which had been produced were not to the purpose Here Mr. Justice Powel expressed his dislike of this Doctrine aside to the Ld. Ch. Justice who concurred with him Going on to prove from the Statute 1 Hen. 4. that there ought to have been no Complaint made till it had come from the Commons in Parliament that the Law continued so till the 3 Hen. 7. where the Grievance was found that Offences in the Intervals of Parliament could not be well punished and then comes the Statute that sets up the Court of Star-Chamber which yet was abolished by the Statute of the 15 Car. 1. That the Proceedings of Parliament produced were no Declarations of Parliament because never passed into an Act and therefore they are Nullities and cannot be accepted of as any Evidence Here again the Ld. Ch. Justice and Mr. Justice Powel discours'd aside saying he thought to impose upon them but they believed not one word he said Then he appealed to the Case in the 2 Cro. 2. Jac. 1. Where it is asserted That the King may make Orders and Constitutions in Matters Ecclesiastical And the Case of De Libellis Famosis which says in the 5th Report If a Person does a thing
Majesty's gracious Government So shall your Petitioner ever pray c. This being read the Bishop return'd and the Chancellor told him they were not concerned in it and asked him If he desired his Answer should be read The Bishop said Yes saying that what he did therein was by Advice of Counsel and therefore hoped would not be interpreted to be done maliciously or obstinately And that in effect he did what the King commanded to be done having advised Doctor Sharp to forbear Preaching till his Majesty had received Satisfaction concerning him and accordingly that he had forborn in his Diocess Then the Bishop's Paper was read which contain'd the King's Letter and Bishop's Answer thereto The King's Letter Dated Monday July 14. 1686. Delivered at Fulham on Thursday June 17. in the Afternoon by Mr. Atterbury the Messenger JAMES R. RIght Reverend Father in God We greet you well Whereas We have been informed and are fully satisfied that Dr. John Sharp Rector of the Parish Church of St. Giles in the Fields in the County of Middlesex and in your Diocess notwithstanding Our late Letter to the most Reverend Fathers in God the Arch-Bishops of Canterbury and York and Our Directions concerning Preachers given at Our Court at White-hall March 15. 1685. in the Second Year of Our Reign yet he the said Dr. John Sharp in contempt of the said Orders hath in some of the Sermons he hath since preached presumed to make unbecoming Reflections and to utter such Expressions as were not fit or proper for him endeavouring thereby to beget k the Minds of his Hearers an evil Opinion of Us and Our Government by insinuating Fears and Jealousies to dispose them to Discontent and to lead them into Disobedience and Rebellion These are therefore to require and command you immediately upon receit hereof forthwith to suspend him from further Preaching in any Parish Church or Chappel in your Diocess until he has given Us Satisfaction and Our further Pleasure be known herein And for so doing this shall be your Warrant And so We bid you heartily farewel Given at our Court at Windsor June 14. 1686. in the Second Year of Our Reign By His Majesty's Command SVNDERLAND The Bishop of London's Answer sent by Dr. Sharp to the Earl of Sunderland then at Hampton-Court on Friday June 18. Who could have no Answer To the Right Honour able the Earl of Sunderland Lord President c. My Lord I Always have and shall count it my Duty to obey the King in what-ever Commands he lays upon me that I can perform with a safe Conscience But in this I humbly conceive I am obliged to proceed according to Law and therefore it is impossible for me to comply because though his Majesty commands me only to execute his Pleasure yet in the Capacity I am to do it I must act as a Judg and your Lordship knows no Judg condemns any Man before he has knowledg of the Cause and has cited the Party However I sent to Mr. Dean and acquainted him with his Majesty's Displeasure whom I find so ready to give all reasonable Satisfaction that I have thought fit to make him the Bearer of this Answer From him that will never be unfaithfull to the King nor otherwise than My Lord Your Lordships most humble Servant H. LONDON After this the Chancellor ask'd the Bishop if he had any more to say Who then desired his Counsel might be heard by whom they would have more clear and full Satisfaction concerning what he had said Whereupon the Bishop was desired to withdraw and after half an hour he and his Counsel were called in who were Dr. Oldish Hodges Prince and Newton Dr. Oldish pleaded That the King's Letter did not take cognizance of the Cause so that it could not be an absolute Suspension because that supposeth a Proof of the Crime charged upon him That there was no such word in their Laws as suspend from Preaching which therefore must be meant silencing and this the Bishop did and in such a Method as is observed in their Courts Dr. Hodges then pleaded That the Bishop had done what the King commanded and that he could not Suspend which is a Judicial Act without first a Citation and Hearing which is the Method of proving before all Courts and appeared to be so in this otherwise the Bishop needed not to have been cited before them And that in returning the King an Answer why he did not do what he commanded him he did but what was his Duty and what was Law Dr. Price pleaded that a Citation was Jure Gentium and could never be taken away by any Positive Command or Law whatsoever that therefore the Bishop had obeyed the King so far as he could in that he had silenced the Doctor the Advice of a Bishop being in some sense an Admonition which is a Judicial Act and was given by the Bishop and obeyed by the Doctor Dr. Newton pleaded that the Bishop had obeyed the King for as in Nature no Man can be desired to do what is impossible so no man can be obliged to do an unlawful Act which Suspension without Citation and Hearing is That the Bishops are Custodes Canonum and therefore must not break them themselves That he had done what was in his Power to do and it was in effect what the King commanded to be done For where he did Rescribere and heard not the further Pleasure of the King returned he ought to conclude the King was satisfied with what he had written according to his Duty and the King had altered his Commands Then the Bishop of London said If he had erred in any Circumstance he was very ready to beg his Majesties Pardon and would be ready to make any reparation he was capable After which the Bishop withdrew for half an Hour and then being called in was desired to attend the Court again on Sept. 6. So the Bishop desiring that care might be took concerning the Minutes taken by the Clerks of what passed that he might not be misrepresented to the King by the Mistake of the Pen-man he went away While the Counsellors were pleading Dr. Pinfold the King's Advocate stood at the Chancellor's Elbow and took Notes by which it was expected that he should make a Reply but he said nothing and 't is supposed that he staid with the Council when the Bishop withdrew and gave them Reasons for his silence On Monday Sept. 6. 1686. There being present in Council the same as before and the Bishop appearing he was desired to sit down and hear his Sentence which to prevent Mistake they had ordered to be put in Writing The Bishop then would have spoke but was not suffered And then Mr. Bridgman their Register read the Instrument whereby the Bishop of London was suspended from the Execution of his Episcopal Office upon pain of Deprivation during his Majesties Pleasure sealed with their Seal but signed by no Body at all And some day after one of the
should never be drawn into Example or Consequence That the Bishops here had done but what became them as Peers and Bishops in the most decent Manner And that unless this humble Petition so presented may be said to be a malicious and seditious Libel with an intent to stir up the People to Sedition the Jury ought not to find my Lords the Bishops guilty upon that Information Mr. Pollexfen next spoke insisting upon the Illegality of the King's Declaration as setting aside all the Law we have in England almost all being Penal Laws not only those before the Reformation but since especially in matters of Religion And therefore the King's Will not being consonant to Law and not obliging nothing can be done with a more Christian Mind than to inform him of it by way of Petition as the Bishops had done Then Mr. Serjeant Pemberton spoke Affirming that the Bishops had done no more than their Duty to God the King and the Church Denying the Dispensing Power as a thing that strikes at the very Foundation of all the Rights Liberties and Properties of the Kings Subjects whatsoever That the King 's Legal Prerogatives are as much for the Advantage of his Subjects as of himself That these Laws he would by his Declaration suspend are the great Bulwark of the Reformed Religion Intended to defend the Nation against false Religions Particularly the Romish Religion which is the very worst of all Religions a Religion no way tolerable nor to be endured here And yet if this Declaration should take effect all Religions would be let in and even that Religion would stand upon the same terms with the Protestant Religion and all the Care and Statutes that had been against it go for nothing That the Bishops have the Care of the Church by their very Function and Office and are bound to take care to keep out all those false Religions that are prohibited and designed to be kept out by Law and therefore could do no less than they did That our Law did allow the King no such Dispensing Power Instancing in that Check the Parliament had given to it in 1662. But here the Ld. Ch. Justice interrupted him as being what had been spoken to already Then Mr. Serjeant Levinz offered to shew that it has been taken all along as the ancient Law of England that such Dispensations ought to be by the King and Parliament and not by the King alone but he was stop'd enough having been offer'd already Therefore the Bishops Counsel proceeded to prove what had been said and to that end was produced and read in Court the Record of Richard the Second wherein the Parliament gave the King a Power to dispense with the Statute of Provisors which was a Penal Law concerning collating and presenting to Dignities and Benefices of the Church only till the next Parliament declaring withal that it was a Novelty and that it should not be drawn into Example Then the Journal of the House of Lords was produced and his Majesty's Speech to both Houses in 1662 read wherein is this Clause That if the Dissenters will demean themselves peaceably and modestly under the Government his Majesty said he could heartily wish that he had a Power of Indulgence to use upon occasion Whereupon there was a Bill in the House of Lords brought in to enable the King to dispense with several Laws which was read and committed but further than that it went not Which Bill was also read out of the Journal Then the Journal of the House of Commons was produced and a Vote read which passed Feb. 25. 1662. That no Indulgence be granted to the Dissenters from the Act of Vniformity With the Commons Address and Reasons for this Vote wherein was declared That the Act of Vniformity could not be dispensed with without an Act of Parliament The Journal of the House of Lords was again produced and the King's Speech to both Houses on Feb. 5. 1672 read wherein he mentions his Declaration for Indulgence The Journal then of the House of Commons was again produced and the Commons Petition and Address to the King Feb. 14. 1672 was read Wherein they thank him for his Speech And tell him They have considered his Declaration for Indulgence dated the 15th of March last And find themselves bound in Duty to inform his Majesty That Penal Laws in Matters Ecclesiastical cannot be suspended but by Act of Parliament And do therefore beseech him That the said Laws may have their free Course until it shall be otherwise provided for by Act of Parliament Then his Majesty's Answer to that Reply was read wherein he expresses his trouble that his Declaration has disquieted them That he does not pretend to the Right of suspending Laws wherein the Properties Rights or Liberties of any of his Subjects are concerned nor to alter any thing in the established Doctrine or Discipline of the Church of England But his only Design in this was to take off the Penalties and the Statutes inflicted upon Dissenters To which the Commons replied which was then read out of the same Journal That they found his Answer not sufficient to clear the Apprehensions that may justly remain in the Minds of his People by his Majesty's having claimed a Power to suspend Penal Statutes in Matters Ecclesiastical and which his Majesty does still seem to assert in his Answer to be intrusted in the Crown and never questioned in the Reigns of any of his Ancestors Wherein they humbly conceive him misinform'd Since no such Power ever was claimed or exercised by any of his Majesty's Predecessors And if it should be admitted might tend to the interrupting the free Course of the Laws and altering the Legislative Power which hath always been acknowledged to reside in his Majesty and his two Houses of Parliament With an unanimous Consent they therefore again besought him That he would be pleased to give them a full and satisfactory Answer to their Petition and Address and take such effectual Order that the Proceedings in this Matter might not for the future be drawn into Consequence or Example Then the Lords Journal was turned to wherein it waâ— read how that the King communicated this Address to the Lords and desired their Advice And that on March the 8th 1672 He made a Speech to both Houses wherein he tells them That if there was any Scruple remaining in them concerning the Suspension of Penal Laws he here faithfully promised them That what had been done in that Particular should not for the future be drawn either into Consequence or Example After which the Lord Chancellor imparted to them That his Majesty found some dissatisfaction remaining concerning the Officers to be employed abroad but if that bred any Umbrage the King commanded him to let them know That he resolves to give both his Houses full Satisfaction to their Desires And that his Majesty had last Night in pursuance of what he then intended and declared this Morning concerning the Suspension of
wherein he says The Design prospered so well that he doubted not but in a little time the Business would be managed to the utter Ruin of the Protestant Party And by other Letters he writes to the French King's Confessor that the Assistance of his most Christian Majesty is necessary and desires Mony from him to carry on the Design But there was one Letter without Date more bloody than all the rest which was written to Le Chese in some short time after the long Letter of Sept. 29 1675. wherein among many other things Mr. Coleman expresses himself thus We have a mighty Work upon our hands no less than the Conversion of three Kingdoms and the utter subduing of a Pestilent Heresy which hath for some time domineer'd over this Northern Part of the World and there never were such hopes of success since the Death of our Queen Mary as now in our days And in the Conclusion of this Letter he implores Le Chese to get all the Aid and Assistance he can from France and that next to God Almighty he did rely upon the mighty Mind of his Most Christian Majesty and therefore did hope Le Chese would procure Mony and Assistance from him Then Dr. Oates at the desire of the Prisoner was call'd again concerning the time of the Consult Coleman offering to prove that he was the most part of that Month in Warwickshire offering something to excuse himself from the Guilt of Treason but being clearly convic'd in both Points Sir Francis Winnington his Majesty's Solitcior General sum'd up the Evidence to which Serjeant Pemberton added something and then the Lord Chief Justice Scroggs spoke to the Jury who presently brought the Prisoner in Guilty who on the Morrow Morning being brought to the Bar offered again something as to his being out of Town and pleaded the King's Act of Grace the insufficiency of which as to him being shewn the Ld. Ch. Justice directed a very excellent and Christian Speech to him pronouncing Sentence upon him to be hang'd drawn and quartered And on Tuesday Decemb. 3. following he was accordingly drawn on a Sledg from Newgate to Tyburn where he declared that he had been a Roman Catholick for many Years and that he thanked God he died in that Religion and he said he did not think that Religion at all prejudicial to the King and Government The Sheriff told him if he had any thing to say by way of Confession or Contrition he might proceed otherwise it was not seasonable for him to go on with such like Expressions And being asked if he knew any thing of the Murther of Sir Edmondbury Godfrey he declared upon the words of a dying Man he knew not any thing of it for that he was a Prisoner at that time Then after some private Prayers and Ejaculations to himself the Sentence was executed upon him The Trials of William Ireland Thomas Pickering and John Grove at the Sessions-house in the Old-Baily on Tuesday December 17 1678. THen and there were Arraigned Thomas White alias Whitebread William Ireland John Fenwick Thomas Pickering and John Grove upon an Indictment of High-Treason for conspiring to murder the King To which they pleaded Not Guilty Their Jury were Sir Will. Roberts Bar. Sir Phil. Matthews Bar. Sir Charles Lee Kt. Edward Wilford Esq John Foster Esq Joshua Galliard Esq John Byfield Esq Thomas Eaglesfield Esq Thomas Johnson Esq John Pulford Esq Thomas Earnesby Esq Rich. Wheeler Gent. To whom the Indictment was read and Sir Creswel Levinz opened it Sir Samuel Baldwyn opened the Charge and Mr. Finch all of Counsel for the King in this Cause opened the Evidence And Dr. Oates being sworn deposed That in December last VVhitebread receiv'd a Patent from the General of the Jesuits at Rome to be Provincial of that Order That after that he ordered Conyers to preach against the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy at St. Omers upon St. Thomas of Canterbury's day That he sent several Letters thither to Ashby about Assassinating the King and in February a Summons to the Consult held April 24 upon which nine did appear at London and the Consult was begun at the White-Horse Tavern in the Strand and afterwards adjourn'd into several little Meetings wherein a Resolve was drawn up by Secretary Mico for Pickering and Grove to go on in their Attempt to kill the King for which Grove was to have 15000 l. and Pickering 30000 Masses and this Resolve was signed by Whitebread Fenwick Ireland and others whom he saw sign it That in June the Witness was sent over to murder Dr. Tongue for translating the Jesuits Morals out of French that he met with Fenwick at Dover whose Box being seiz'd by the Searchers then said that if they had search'd his Pockets they would have found Letters as might have cost him his Life That soon after Ashby who had been sometime Rector of St. Omers brought Instructions from VVhitebred who was then looking after his Charge as Provincial beyond Sea that Care should be taken for the Murder of the Bishop of Hereford and Dr. Stillingfleet and that 10000 l. should be proposed to Sir Geo. VVakeman for poysoning the King and that nevertheless Pickering and Grove should go on still in their Attempts That the 10000 l. was proposed to but refused as too little by Sir George whereupon VVhitebread writ from St. Omers that 15000 l. should be proposed which was both proposed and accepted whereof 5000 l. was paid by Coleman or his Order That in August at a Consult of the Jesuits with the Benedictines the four Ruffians were recommended by Dr. Fogarthy to which Fenwick being present consented and they were sent away to VVindsor and the next day 80 l. was sent after them That in this Month other Letters came from VVhitebread ordering Harcourt to send one Moor and Sanders alias Browne into Scotland to carry on the Design which Fenwick and Ireland had plotted of a Rebellion there That Pickering and Grove did accept the Terms and Grove took the Sacrament and Oaths of Secrecy upon it after the Consult was over in VVhitebread's Chamber That he saw Pickering and Grove several time walking in the Park together with their Screw'd Pistols that they had Silver Bullets to shoot with which he had seen and Grove would have had the Bullets to be champt for fear the Would to be given by them might be curable That in March last these Persons having followed the King several Years Pickering had a fair opportunity but that the Flint of his Pistol being loose he durst not venture to give Fire for which Negligence he underwent Penance and had twenty or thirty strokes of Discipline and Grove was chidden for his Carelesness That Fenwick was by when the 80 l. was sent by Harcourt to VVindsor for the four Ruffians That he received the Oath of Secrecy which VVhitebread administred upon a Mass-Book Mico holding the Candle That VVhitebread issued out several Commissions and particularly one for
Paragraph was read out of another of the like Intelligences Num. 127. Saturday March 11. 1681. which was a kind of challenging an Answer to the first Letter and of the City's inspection of the Truth thereof promising Proof to every Tittle without one Papist or Popishly-Affected Person being concern'd therein c. Thus by these Letters and Intelligences they endeavoured to stifle the Evidence of the King and arraign the Justice of the Nation Then Mr. Sanders of Counsel for Pain acknowledg'd the rashness and unadvisedness of the Act but that it was not out of Malice that he was no Papist nor any of his Family and how ingenuously it was done of him to acknowledg his Letter much more than to write it and bring it to be printed Mr. Gooding of Counsel also for Pain acknowledged him sorry for what was done and offered to give any Satisfaction Mr. Yalden of Counsel for Thompson pleaded That the other two drew him in and that it was honestly done of him to discover the Authors and that what was in his Intelligences was not so much his Fault as the Authors for whom it was free to put what they would in there he being paid for his pains Mr. Osborne of Counsel for Farrell acknowledg'd it a foolish thing but offer'd his Witnesses to be heard Farrell then first of all called one Mr. Hazard who deposed That he went along with Farrell to see Sir E. Godfrey's Body at the White-House That he lay there upon a Table and his Eyes were closed and Shoes clean as if he had been upon an Hay-Mow That he saw Gobbets of Blood in the Ditch where he had lain and likewise at a place where there were two or three things to go over William Batson deposed That he also saw the Body at the White-House and the Blood in the Ditch but that it looked to him as if it had been laid there rather than any thing else Then one Fisher who helped to strip the Body at the White-House deposed That his Shoes were clean and he saw no Blood but on his back-part where was Blood that he seemed to have been strangled and his Neck was so weak that it might be turned any where Then John Rawson deposed That he help'd to carry the Body away out of the Ditch and pulled out the Sword that he saw Blood upon some Posts and upon the Table where it lay and on the Floor and that there were something like Fly-blows in his Eyes tho being ask'd he said he saw no Flies busy at that time of the Year At which the People laughed Mrs. Rawson his Wife only swore That there was Blood and Water ran through the Table and that many People said there were Fly-blows but she did not mind it tho there was something like Fly-blows Then Farrell proposed to prove the difference between Prance's and Bedloe's Evidence by Copies of the Journals of the House of Lords and the Ld. Ch. Justice gave him leave freely to prove what he would or could But he went off from this Proof and called other Witnesses c. Mr. Chase the Son deposed That he saw no Blood in the Ditch but he saw some four or five Yards off which the Constable told him followed the Sword when it was pulled out That he saw the Body in the House wherein was two Wounds and a great Contusion on the left Ear his whole Face much bruised and he believed him strangled and that those Injuries offered him could not be after he was dead Mr. Hobbs deposed That it was his Opinion he was Strangled his Face was bloted and the bloody Vessels of his Eyes full and he observed no Fly-blows Mr. Chase the Father deposed That he observed the Body beaten from the Neck to the Stomach so as he never saw the like That Mr. Farrell telling him soon after what Proof he could make of this Business he disswaded him as being impossible to say any thing against it that had the face of Truth That after his Book came out Mr. Farrell on Easter-Eve told him That six Months before he had given him good Counsel if he had taken it Then Mr. Brown deposed That he saw no Fly-blows on the Body nor ever said he did but that Mr. Farrell would have had him said so and another time told him he was wrong in his Affidavit as if he knew what he could make Affidavit of better than himself Then Mr. Smith deposed That he did not carry any of the Blood home in his Handkerchief as Farrell had called him for to declare Then Mr. Lazingby was sworn to declare Whether Men that kill themselves do not look as Sir E. Godfrey's Body did He deposed That he seemed to him to be strangled and that which strangled him was kept about his Neck till he was cold because his Face look'd bloody and bloted and that he put his Finger into the Blood which lay some four Yards from the Ditch and it smelt like that which comes from a Body after a Fortnight's Time dead rather than a Weeks it being Blood and Water whereas the Water will separate from the Blood That the Body was bruised from the Neck to die Stomach his Eyes were open and Blood-shed That his Clothes were dry which he admired at there having been so great a Storm the Afternoon before Farrell then proffer'd to prove himself no Papist but the Ld. Ch. Justice told him His Religion was not worth inquiring into And Searj Maynard observ'd how little Service his Witnesses had done him not one haying spoke on his side but quite against him and how little it belonged to such Fellows as he to meddle in this Business or to write about it proffering to call some Witnesses in to prove him as wicked a Liar as lived but it was thought unnecessary and was therefore waved The Ld. Ch. Justice observing what liberty he had given the Defendant to call what Witnesses he would because he was willing to hear what could be said in the Case whether a Doubt could be made in the World that Sir E. Godfrey was not murdered c. leaving it to the Jury Whether upon the Evidence they did not believe them all Guilty of this Design of traducing the Justice of the Nation The Jury thereupon without going from the Bar found them all three Guilty of the Information And on Monday July 3. they being brought to the Bar of the Court of King's Bench to receive the Judgment Mr Thompson the Counsellor moved for Judgment and further to satisfy the World produced Mr. Spence's Affidavit before Mr. Justice Dolbin July 10. 1682. wherein he had deposed that on Thursday Octob. 10. 1678. As he was passing by Somerset-House about 7 at Night five or six Men standing at the Water-gate laid hold on both his Arms and dragg'd him about a Yard within the Gate it being dark but one of them cried out which he believes was Hill whom he very well knew and said This is not
the Ld. Ch. Justice Scroggs on Wednesday Feb. 11. 1679. THere the Prisoner was arraigned upon an Indictment for High-Treason for conspiring the Death of the King the Subversion of the Government and the Protestant Religion on Saturday January 24 1679. To which he pleaded Not Guilty desiring a Jury of his own Country-Men which was promised him and some Friend to assist him because he was deaf being above 85 Years of Age. On Wednesday Feb. 11 following the Prisoner being brought to his Trial the Jury sworn after several Challenges were Sir Thomas Hodson Richard Beaumount Esq Stephen Wilks Esq Jervas Rockley Esq Robert Leeke Esq William Batt Esq Charles Best Esq John Cross Esq Barton Allett Esq William Milner Esq John Oxley Esq Francis Oxley Esq To whom the Indictment being read Mr. Dormer Serj. Maynard and Mr. Attorn Gen. opened the same And then Mr. Bolron being sworn deposed that he came to live with Sir T. Gascoyne in 1674 as Steward of his Cole-works and in 1675 he being fearful of his Estate lest it might be liable to be forfeited to the King he was a Witness to a collusive Conveyance thereof and saw him colourably receive 1000 l. of Sir William Ingleby he and one Matthias Higgringil helping to count the Money In 1676 he heard the Prisoner say to one Christopher Metcalf that he was resolved to send 3000 l. to the Jesuits in London for the carrying on of the Design and that he would return it by 300 l. at a time to prevent Suspicion by the hands of Richard Phisicke and about the beginning of 77 he heard the Prisoner say that he had returned it and that if it had been a thousand times as much he would be glad to spend it all in so good a Cause In 77 that there was a Consult at Barnbow-Hall in Yorkshire which is the Prisoner's House where was Sir Miles Stapleton Charles Ingleby Esq Esquire Gascoyne the Lady Tempest Thomas Thwing Sir VValter Vavasor Sir Francis Hungate Mr. Middleton Robert Killinbeck a Jesuit and VVilliam Rushton a Priest their discourse was about establishing a Nunnery at Dolebank in hopes that the Plot of killing the King would take effect resolving they would venture their Lives and Estates to further it And the Prisoner concluded to give 90 l. a Year for ever for the maintenance of this Nunnery Upon which they all agreed that after his Death he should be canonized a Saint Accordingly the Prisoner did erect a Nunnery at Dolebank near Ripley where Mrs. Lashalls was Lady Abbess Mrs. Beckwith and Mrs. Benningfield her Assistants Ellen Thwing Eliz. Butcher Mary Root others were Nuns here they were to reside till the King was kill'd and then to remove to Heworth near York and here they did reside near a Year and an half till the Plot was discovered and he had seen several Leters from them to the Prisoner That about March last Esquire Gascoyne and Mr. Middleton got Licences from a Justice of Peace to travel to London and he heard them tell the Prisoner they designed to fly into France and accordingly sold off their Goods the Prisoner approving their Resolution That on May the 30th last the Prisoner bid the Witness go into the Gallery where one VVilliam Rushton his Confessor came to him and discours'd him about his having taken the Oath of Allegiance telling him it was a damnable Sin he having thereby denied the Power of the Pope to absolve him from it but that the Pope had Power to depose the King and had done it and that it was a meritorious act to kill the King and if he would undertake to do it he would assist him and give him Absolution quoting that Scripture Thou shalt bind their Kings in Fetters and their Princes in Chaines concluding that the King was deposed and it was meritorious to kill him and that unless he would turn Roman Catholick the Pope would give away his Kingdoms to another The same day the Prisoner talked with him in his Chamber and inquired of him what Rushton had said to him which he told him and then taking him by the hand the Prisoner told him if he would undertake a design that he and others had to kill the King he would give him 1000 l. but refusing to be concerned in Blood he desired him of all Love to Secresy That in September 1678. he heard the Prisoner tell his Daughter Lady Tempest that he would send 150 l. to Dolebanke in hopes the blow would be given shortly which she seemed to like and he heard a Letter read afterwards from Cornwallis that he had received it but it was too little for the carrying on so great a Design That he was a Protestant when he came first to the Prisoner's Service and turn'd Papist about VVhitsontide 1675. and left his Service in good Friendship July the 1st 1678. and turn'd Protestant again in June 1679. when he first made this discovery Mr. Mowbray deposed that he came to lie with Sir Tho. Gascoyne the beginning of 1674. and used to wait upon him in his Chamber and to be diligent in attending Mr. Rushton his Confessor at the Altar who therefore permitted him to be present in his Chamber where he heard him and other Priests discoursing in 1676 of a Design laid for setting up Popery and how likely it was to succeed most of the considerable Papists in England having engaged to act for it and if it could not be done by fair means force must be used declaring that London and York must be fired and that the King in Exile had promised the Jesuits beyond Sea to establish their Religion whenever he was restored which they now despaired of and therefore he was adjudged an Heretick and was to be killed and Rushton told the other Priests that according to Agreement he had given the Oath of Secresy and the Sacrament to the Prisoner and his Son and Daughter who had engaged to be faithful active and secret That about Michaelmas there was another meeting of these Priests and others where they declared that the King was an Heretick and that the Pope had excommunicated him and all other Hereticks in England Scotland and Ireland and that force was to be made use of And then did Rushton produce a List of about 4 or 500 Names of them that were engaged in the Design of killing the King and promoting the Catholick Religion which Rushton read over among which were the Names of the Prisoner Tho. Gascoyne Esq the Lady Tempest Mr. Vavasor Sir Francis Hungast Sir John Savile the two Townleys Mr. Sherborn and others and he knew the Prisoner's Name to be writ by his own hand They declared also that the Pope had given Commission to put on the Design with speed and had given a plenary Indulgence of 10000 Years for all that should act either in Person or Estate for killing the King and setting up Popery in England besides a Pardon and other Gratifications That the Priests that used
next Design was to be on Novemb. the 17th but the Country not being then in a readiness the Earl of Shaftsbury upon hearing it went away for Holland That after this they all began to lie under a sense that they had gone so far and communicated it to so many that it was unsafe to make a Retreat And for the carrying it on thought it necessary there should be some General Council that should take upon them the care of the whole Whereupon they erected the Council of six which consisted of the Duke of Monmouth Earl of Essex Lord Russel Mr. Hambden jun. Col. Sidney and himself That these met at Mr. Hambden's House about the middle of January last and there the Particulars offer'd to their Consideration whereto they were to bring their Advice were Whether the Insurrection were most proper to be begun in London or in the Country or both in an Instant What Countries and Towns were fittest and most dispos'd to Action What Arms were necessary to be got and how to be disposed How to raise a Common Bank of 25 or 30000 l. to answer all Occasions And lastly How to draw Scotland to consent with them it being thought necessary that all Diversion should be given That about ten Days after the same Persons met again at the Lord Russel's where it was resolv'd to send into Scotland to invite some Persons hither who could give the best accompt of the State thereof viz. Sir John Cockram the Lord Melvil and Sir Hugh Campbel and that in Discourse it was referr'd to Col. Sidney to take care of that Business who afterwards told him he had sent Aaron Smith and given him 60 Guinies for his Journey That to avoid Observation they concluded not to meet till the return of this Messenger and he going in the mean time to his Estate in Essex and thence to the Bath he knew nothing more only when he came back he was informed Smith was come back and Sir John Cockram with him That he was sure the Lord Russel was present at these Meetings and to his understanding did consent though nothing was put to the Vote And he wished he could say the Lord Russel was not there To this the Prisoner insisted that most he had said was only hearsay and the two times they met was not upon any formed Design but to talk of News and they were delighted to hear the Lord Howard talk being full of Discourse of a voluble Tongue and talk'd well And that he never saw any of the Scotch Gentlemen only the Lord Melvil but never upon this Account Here the Attorny General urged that Aaron Smith did go into Scotland and that Campbel he went for was taken which Mr. Atterbury swore that he was then in his Custody and that he had been by his own Confession four days in London before he was took Then Mr. West deposed That he never had any Conversation with the Prisoner only he had heard Mr. Ferguson and Col. Rumsey say that the Lord Russel in the Insurrection in November intended to take his Post in the West where Mr. Trenchard had failed them and that they most depended upon him because he was looked upon as a Person of great Sobriety But this being all but Hear-say the Court would not admit it as Evidence The King's Counsel therefore left the Evidence here and call'd on the Prisoner to make his Defence who to all this made Answer That he could not but think himself mighty unfortunate to stand there charg'd with so high a Crime and that intermixed with the horrid Practices and Speeches of other People the King's Counsel taking all Advantages and improving and heightning things against him That he was no Lawyer an unready Speaker and not so well prepared as he should be c. That he thought his Jury were Men of Consciences and would consider that the Witnesses against him swore to save their own Lives Neither was what Col. Rumsey swore enough to take away his Life or if it were the Time was elapsed by the 13th of this King which limits Prosecution to six Months Neither was a design of Levying War Treason unless it appeared by some overt-Overt-Act as appears by the 25th of Edw. 3d. And then desiring to know upon what Statute he was indicted it was told him upon the 25th of Edw. the 3d. Whereupon he desired Counsel upon these two Points as Matter of Law Whether the Treason were duly proved and if it were Whether it were punishable by the Statute In Answer to which the Court inform'd him That if he were contented that the Fact should be taken as proved against him and desired Counsel upon what was bare Matter of Law he should have it granted but there could be no Matter of Law admitted but upon a Fact admitted and stated And whereas he insisted that the Business at Mr. Shepherd's House was sworn to only by one Witness It was answered that if there were one Witness of one Act of Treason another of a 2d and another of a 3d that manifested the same Treason it was sufficient The Statute then of 25th of Edw. 3d. c. 2. was read And then the Prisoner insisted that he was never but at one Meetings at Mr. Shepherd's and Col. Rumsey was there before he came in but Rumsey said No the Duke of Monmouth and the Lord Russel went away together Then in behalf of the Prisoner the Earl of Anglesey declared That visiting the Earl of Bedford last week the Lord Howard came in and told the Earl of Bedford that his Son could not be in such a Plot or suspected of it and that he knew nothing against the Lord Russel or any Body else of such a Barbarous Design And then going on to tell what the Lady Chaworth had told him the King's Counsel interrupted him telling him as the Court would not permit them to give Hear-say-Evidence against the Prisoner so they must not permit his Lordship to do it for the Prisoner Mr. Edward Howard declared That the Lord Howard took it upon his Honour and his Faith he knew nothing of any Person concerned in that Business and noâ— only thought the Lord Russel unjustly suffered but he took God and Man to Witness he thought the Lord Russel the Worthiest Man in the World Dr. Burnet declared The Lord Russel was with him the Night after the Plot broke out and did then as he had done before with Hands and Eyes lifted up to Heaven protest that he knew nothing of any Plot nor believ'd any and treated it with great Scorn and Contempt The Lord Cavendish testified to the Prudence and Honour of the Lord Russel and how unlikely it was for him to be concern'd and had heard him declare his ill Opinion of Rumsey two or three Days after the Discovery and therefore that it was unlikely he would entrust him with such a Secret Dr. Thomas Cox and Dr. Burnet again testified as to his Life and Conversation and of his aversness to
Word again That they offered him their Petition to read but he did not think it fit for him to do it and therefore he refused and would not read it but that he went immediately to the King and acquainted his Majesty with it and he commanded him to let them know they might come when they would which he immediately did they said they would go and speak with some of their Brethren that were not far off in the mean time he gave order that they should be admitted when they came and they did in a little time return and went first into the Bed-Chamber and then into the Room where the King was And all this was before they appeared at the Council This was no Evidence Mr. Pollexfen said against the Archbishop because he was not there and nothing had been proved against him as done in Middlesex and for the other 6 Lords the Lord President did not say that this is the Petition that they said they had to deliver to the King Nor did he see them deliver any thing but that is still lest doubtful so that it stands upon Presumption and not upon Proof However the Kings Counsel desired to leave it fairly to the Jury upon this Fact and then therefore the Bishops Counsel desired to be heard in their Defence And First Sir Robert Sawyer in a long and learned Speech told the Jury that the Charge against the Bishops was That they did conspire to diminish the Royal Authority and to this end make a Libel against the King but that the Evidence fell far short of this which only proved that the Bishops in as private and humble a manner as they could presented the Paper to the King which was a Petition to be relieved against an Order of Council which they conceived they were aggrieved by and herein was no Sedition either in the matter or manner of delivering it That it was not to be question'd but that any Subject commanded by the King to do an unlawful Thing or what was against his Conscience might humbly tell the King why he could not obey him And that whereas Mr Attorn Gen. had at first said that the Bishops were not sued as Bishops nor prosecuted for their Religion he could not conceive what they were sued for else the Information being against them for an Act they did as Bishops and no otherwise it being what was their Duty and properly within their Sphere and Jurisdiction That whether therefore they consider'd the Matter of this Petition or Manner of delivering it or the Persons that deliver'd it there can appear no Reason for such an Information against them In the Matter of the Petition he consider'd two Things First the Prayer wherein he shewed there could be nothing of Falsity nor any thing contrary to Law for which reason he said possibly it was left out of the Information as being thought no part of a Libel and so made a deform'd story of it without Head or Tail a Petition directed to no Body and for nothing it being without both Title and Prayer Secondly he considered the Reasons of the Bishops for not complying expressed in it The first whereof is the Declarations of Parliament against the Dispensing Power and the next because it is a Matter of so great Moment and Consequence to the whole Nation that they could not make themselves so far Parties in it For if it be of any effect then by it not only the Laws of the Reformation but of all Religion are suspended and what a mischief that would be to the Church which is under the Care of my Lords the Bishops any one might easily apprehend While Sir Robert was speaking to these things the Ld. Ch. Justice said aside that he must not suffer this They intended to dispute the King's Power in suspending Laws Mr. Justice Powel reply'd to him that they could not avoid that Point because if the King had no such Power which was his Judgment then this Petition could not be Libellous The Lord Chief Justice told him he knew he was full of that Doctrine and because the Bishops should have no occasion to say that he denied to hear their Counsel he would let them talk on till they were weary Then for the Manner of delivering the Petition Sir Robert Sawyer proceeded to shew that from their Evidence it appeared to be in the most private and humble manner Leave being first asked and then given Then for the Persons he shewed that they did no more than what was their Duty and belonged to them the Act of 1 Eliz. cap. 2. making them special Guardians of the Law of Uniformity and of that other Law in his late Majesties Reign where all the Clauses of 1 Eliz. are revived Now in that Statute of 1 Eliz. there is this Clause And for the due Execution hereof the Queen 's most Excellent Majesty the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and all the Commons in this present Parliament assembled do in God's Name earnestly require and charge all the Archbishops and Bishops and other Ordinaries that they do endeavour themselves to the utmost of their Knowledges that the due and true execution hereof may be had throughout their Diocesses and Charges as they will answer before God for such Evils and Plagues wherewith Almighty God may justly punish his People for neglecting this good and wholsome Law By this he shewed that it was plain that the Bishops upon pain of bringing upon themselves the Imprecation of this Act of Parliament were obliged to see it executed and then when any thing comes under their Knowledg especially if they are to be Actors in it that has such a tendency to destroy the very Foundations of the Church as the Suspending of Laws has it concerns them that have no other Remedy to address the King by Petition about it and 't is the Duty of an Officer or Magistrate to tell the King what is Law and what is not he instancing in Cavendish's Case and another in the time of the Lord Hobbart Next to him Mr. Finch spoke briefly recapitulating the King's Evidence and then shewing that this Petition as well for the Matter of it as Manner of delivering it and the Persons by whom it was delivered was no Libel Particularly that the King 's Regal Authority and Royal Prerogative was no way diminished thereby for that the Declaration was founded upon a Dispensing Power which the King could not have Because a Power to abrogate Laws is as much a part of the Legislature which is only in the King and his two Houses of Parliament as to make Laws and a Power to suspend is equal to a Power of abrogating Laws because they are no longer in being as Laws while they are suspended That this was never attempted but in the last King's time which was took notice of and declared against in Parliament in the Years 1662 and 1672 the effect of which was that His Majesty cancell'd the Declaration and declared that it
that is Libellous you shall not examin the Fact but the Consequence And therefore if the King hath a Power to make Orders in matters Ecclesiastical and do so if any bring that Power into Question that is Sedition and the Legality or Illegality of the Order ought not to be examined Whence he doubted not but they had here a good Case for the King and that the Jury would give them a Verdict Then Mr. Justice Holloway asking him What the Bishops could have done in this Case if they might not Petition he answered That they should have acquiesced till the meeting of the Parliament At which some People in the Court hissed Adding that it was one thing for a Man to submit to his Prince where he cannot obey him and another thing to affront him this being Libelling with a Witness To which the Ld. Ch. Justice said That he was of Opinion that the Bishops might Petition the King though out of Parliament but not in such a Reflective manner because that would make the Government very Precarious But Mr. Justice Powel told Mr. Sol. Gen. it would have been too late to stay for a Parliament and if the Bishops had disobeyed without Petitioning it would have looked like a piece of Sullenness and they would have been blamed for it as much on the other side Mr. Serj. Baldock then spoke also for the King insisting on the Disobedience of the Bishops to the King who is their Supreme Ordinary they being not commanded to read it themselves but only to distribute them to be read and their giving Reasons for their Disobedience in a Libellous Petition charging the King with an illegal Act reflecting upon his Prudence Justice and Honour in laying his Commands upon them which being done by Bishops and having an Universal influence upon all the People he left it to his Lordship and Jury whether they ought not to answer for it Then Sir Barth Shore the Recorder spoke on the same Side saying He thought the Information proved for that no Answer had been made to it The Answer made being but Argumentative and taken either from the Persons of the Defendants as Peers who could have no right to Petition libellously or from the Form of it's being a Petition which could no more excuse them if it were scandellous than any other The Author of Julian the Apostate having as much right to publish his Book as the Bishops had to deliver this Libel to the King For which comparison he was checked by Mr. Justice Powel who told him it was the Birth-right of the Subject to Petition And that it was as lawful for the City of London to Petition for the Sitting of a Parliament as it was for the Bishops to give Reasons for their Disobedience to the King's Command And if their Petition was reckoned Libellous in saying that what the King had done in Dissolving the Parliament was an Obstruction of Justice what other Construction can be made of the Bishops saying that the King's Declaration is illegal And if they were so severely punished as to lose their Charter for what they did the Bishops ought to have the like Condemnation Then Mr. Serj. Trinder spoke in defence of the King 's Dispensing Power alledging Sir Edward Hales Case which the Ld. Ch. Justice told him was beside the Matter Then he condemned the questioning of the Bishops Counsel of the King's Power by referring themselves to the Declarations in Parliament as if the King's Authority was under the Suffrages of a Parliament that yet no such Declaration was produced they being mistaken and therefore it is in the nature of false News which is a Crime for which the Law will punish them Then the Ld. Ch. Justice summ'd up the Evidence and in conclusion gave his own Opinion that the Bishops Petition was a Libel Then Mr. Justice Powel gave his Reasons why he thought it no Libel and that the King had no Dispensing Power Next Mr. Justice Allybone endeavoured to make out and declared his Opinion that it was a Libel He refused to speak to the Prerogatives of the King as the Ld. Ch. Justice had done before him Then Wine was sent for for the Jury And upon request they were allowed to have along with them a Copy of the Information the Original Petition and the Declarations under the Great Seal But the Journals were not allowed them Mr. Sollicitor saying they were no Evidence Then the Court arose and the Jury went together to consider of their Verdict and staid together all Night without Fire or Candle On Saturday June 30. 1688. about Ten of the Clock in the Morning the Bishops came again into the Court and immediately after the Jury were brought to the Bar. And their Appearance being taken they delivered in their Verdict Not Guilty At which there were several great Shouts in the Court and throughout the Hall Mr. Sol. Gen. taking notice of some Persons in the Court that shouted moved very earnestly that they might be committed Whereupon a Gentleman of Grays-Inn was laid hold on but was soon after discharged And after the shouting was over the Ld. Ch. Justice reproved the Gentleman saying he was as glad as he could be that the Bishops were acquitted but his manner of rejoicing here in Court was indecent he might rejoice in his Chamber or elsewhere and not here Then asking Mr. Attorny if he had any thing more to say to the Bishops He said No. Then the Court arose and the Bishops went away FINIS APPENDIX To the Kings most Excellent Majesty the humble Petition of Algernon Sidney Esq Sheweth THAT Your Petitioner after a long and close Imprisonment was on the 7th Day of this Month brought with a Guard of Souldiers into the Palace-Yard upon an Habeas Corpus directed to the Lieutenant of the Tower before any Indictment had been exhibited against him But while he was there detained a Bill was exhibited and found whereupon he was immediately carried to the King's-Bench and there Arraigned In this surprise he desired a Copy of the Indictment and leave to make his Exceptions or to put in a Special Plea and Counsel to frame it but all was denied him He then offer'd a Special Plea ready ingrossed which was also rejected without reading and being threatned That if he did not plead Guilty or Not Guilty Judgment of High-Treason should be entred he was forced contrary to Law as he supposes to come to a General Issue in pleading Not Guilty Novemb. 21. He was brought to his Trial and the Indictment being so perplexed and confused as neither He nor any of his Friends that heard it could fully comprehend the Scope of it He was wholly unprovided of all the Helps that the Law allows to every Man for his Defence Whereupon he did again desire a Copy and produced an Authentick Copy of the Statute of the 46 Edw. 3. whereby it is Enacted That every Man shall have a Copy of any Record that touches him in any
Lady Tempest would have hang'd him for breaking a Trunk but now he would be even with her and that Sir Miles Stapleton kept Priests in his House but he would apprehend them presently for he might have 20 l. apiece for taking of them Richard Pears Sir Miles's Man testified that three or four days after his Master was taken into Custody Bolron asked him if they did not blame him for accusing his Master and he saying he did not hear him named said he it was not him but I must not tell who it is and said he would have gone to have seen Sir Miles but I think said he he does not know me Then one Stephen Tompson declared some threatning Words of Bolrons against Sir Thomas Gascoyne that he would do him some ill turn but it not concerning the Prisoner the Court would not admit it The Lady Vavasor said she believed her Husband was not at Barnborow in any part of the Year because he was infirm at York Bolron having sworn that Sir VValter Vavasor was one at that Consult but this was not judg'd a conclusive Evidence Then Mr. Leggat said that he had heard Bolron say he knew nothing against Sir Miles Stapleton And Mrs. Elizabeth Holmes said that Bolron meeting her in London said he heard she was to be a Witness against him at York but if she would be kind to him he would be so to her and speak as favourably as he could and he said if he had known he should have been no better rewarded he would never have been a Witness the Devil should have been a Witness as soon as he Then Edward Cooper told what he heard Mowbray say as before in Thwing's Trial but the Court observed that being before his Discovery and while he was a Papist and on the High-way it could not be material Then Madam Sherborn testified that Bolron and Mowbray came to her house under a pretence to search for Priests and Bolron took away several parcels of Silver with him But the Court would not suffer such Evidence besides that Mowbray deposed it was only Chalices and other Popish Trinkets After this the Counsel for the King called one Dixon who swore that he had 40 s. proffer'd him to be a Witness for Sir Tho. Gascoyne in Novemb. 1679. Then Mr. VVilson deposed that Mr. Babbington Sollicitor for Sir Miles would have given him 10 l. and Hickeringil proffer'd him 10 l. to have been a Witness for Sir Miles Then Christopher Langley deposed also that VVil. Batley and John Ross proffer'd him two Oxen and ten Sheep to witness for Sir Miles those things they should direct him Richard Corker deposed that he was by and heard that very proffer made to Langley Then Mr. Baines deposed that Mrs. Holmes proffer'd him 60 l. per annum and Mrs. Hewit said she would give him more if he would say nothing against Sir Miles After this Mr. Justice Dolben summ'd up the Evidence and Baron Gregory proceeded to do the same and then the Jury withdrew for half an hour and gave in their Verdict Not Guilty The Trial of George Busby Priest at the Assizes at Derby on Monday July 25 1681. HE then and there appeared and having been Arraigned he now refused to plead in stead thereof presenting a Petition to the Court shewing that he was committed to the Goal in March last for being a Popish Priest and that having obtained his Habeas Corpus to be removed to London the Under-Sheriff then dying the Habeas Corbus was not executed Praying therefore that he may be removed to the King's-Bench that he may have time to make his Defence he depending upon his Habeas Corpus his most material Evidence to clear him and to prove his being an Alien being then in London c. But the Grand Jury having found the Bill the Court told him they must proceed and he was then Indicted as a Romish Priest and Jesuit upon the Statute of 27 Eliz. cap. 2. To which Indictment he excepted because it was not said therein that he took Orders beyond Sea But he was inform'd that his taking Orders any where from the Authority of the Bishop of Rome was Sufficient He then pleaded not Guilty and challenged of the Jury near the Number allowed by the Law Those Sworn were Samuel Ward Gent. Thomas Wilson Gent. John Steer John Ratcliff Ed. Wolmesly Gent. William Horn Gent. George Tricket Gent. Jeremiah Ward John Roper John Creswel Gent. Edmund Woodhead and Anthony Bowne To whom the Indictment being read Mr. Bridges of Counsel for the King in this Cause opened the same and Mr. Coombes another of the King's Counsel opened the Evidence And then Mr. Gilbert a Justice of Peace for the County of Derby was called and Sworn who deposed that he lived within 2 Miles of Mr. Powtrells house at West-Hallam where Busby was took and whose Wife was Busby's Neece and had heard for 6 or 7 Years that he was a Priest and when the Plot broke out that he was a Person concern'd as appeared by a Warrant from the Lords of the Council for his Apprehension which he received March 22 1678. which he producing was read in the Court and on the Monday following searched Mr. Powtrells House for him but could not find him tho afterwards he was informed that he was then in the House In 1679 Mr. Powtrel travelling it was reported Busby was gone with him beyond Sea tho he still remained in that House and last Christmas he was informed that he was seen in Corn-Harvest walking in the Garden with one Anne Smally a Widow which caus'd him to search again for him in March last when this Smally assured him he had been out of England two Years yet he then found in Busby's Chamber Popish Vestments a Surplice Wafers an Altar-stone c. but could not find him About a fortnight after he searched again for him surprizing them at one in the Night but could have no admittance till they broke open the door and going into Busby's Chamber he found the fire had been lately extinguished and the Bed-Clothes laid in confused heaps on the bed some part of them warm and some cold but the feather-bed quite cold till feeling underneath he found it warm and that it had been turned which assured him that the Priest was in the House but the Persons in the house denied it and only jeered them for searching for a Person that was beyond Sea and those that were without tho they heard a trampling and directed the Searchers within to the place yet they were from one till after 10 next Morning before they could find him Which at last they did in a little hole under the Tiling whence they carried him to Derby and Mr. Gilbert having took his Examination committed him to Goal on March 16th and sent Word to the King and Council of what he had done The Prisoner then pleaded his being an Alien born at Brussels his Father removing his Family thither during the Troubles
but the Act for Naturalization was read to him and he thereby judg'd a Natural-born Subject Then Joseph Dudley deposed that he was a Servant to Mr. Powtrel and had known the Prisoner above six Years and had heard him say Mass Preach Pray Catechise and Christen and seen him in his Robes and that he used to keep fast the Doors tho a Protestant and that he had owned himself a Jesuit to him and that Mr. Evers the Lord Aston's Priest was his Tutor And that he had heard him tell how his Mothers house was Plundred at Coddington in Oxfordshire and how he hid himself in the Curtains being two Years old and in the Garden-Hedge when he was five Years old for fear of the Souldiers and that soon after his Mother went beyond Sea where she had several Children That he endeavour'd to subvert the Witness who seemingly did comply and was therefore entrusted Then to prove him further a Priest Mr. Gilbert produced his Account-Book which he had took which testify'd him to have been Procurator for the Jesuits and to have received Rents of their Lands from 73 till 77 and to have disbursed great sums of Mony and to have had dealings with Gawen Harcourt Turner Ireland Pool Bennet Heaton Thomson and others of the Society and produced his Popish Garments and Trinkets which one Mr. Sheppey a Minister that had formerly been a Popish Priest explained the names and use of to the Court. Then Thomas Houis deposed that this Busby persuaded him to be a Papist being about to marry a Papist's Daughter whom otherwise he could not have and that he gave him Absolution and married him and that he had heard him say Mass several times in his Robes and preach thrice and had received the Sacrament from him and had a Child baptized by him naming where and who were Sureties Elizabeth Evans deposed that she had seen him say Mass in his Priestly Habit and been Confess'd by him and receiv'd the Sacrament from him and was Godmother to a Child baptized by him Dorothy Sanders deposed the same and shewed how he used to elevate the Host only she never saw him baptize Sarah Clark deposed to the same purpose she being the Person that carried Houis's child to be baptized by him There were three or four more Winesses ready to have deposed the like but the Evidence being so full the Court waved them The Prisoner in his own Defence urged that the Witnesses swore to what they did not understand their Service being in Latin and as for the Vestments they were only kept as Monuments and that Lay-Men might wear them as well as Priests which was attested by Robert Needham whom the Prisoner called And Mr. Charles Vmphrevil testified that he had heard Mr. Busby's Mother and Brother say that he was born at Brussels and that he had an Affidavit from the Register at Coddington of all their Children born in England and the Prisoners name is not in the Register Mr. Ed. Mayo affirmed that he had searched the Register there and could not find the Prisoners name relating the Disappointment Busby had of his Habeas Corbus â—â—t the Court judg'd nothing of this material 〈◊〉 â—he Prisoner notwithstanding insisted upon his being an Alien and that it was only Family-duties the Evidence heard him read and had done nothing but what a Lay-Man might do and that therefore the Indictment had not been proved Then Baron Street caused the Statute of 27 Eliz. Cap. 2. to be read and summ'd up the Evidence shewing withal the invalidity of his Defence After which the Jury withdrew for a short space and then brought the Prisoner in Guilty And then Baron Street having told him that the King had commanded him to be Reprieved from Execution pronounced Sentence upon him to be Drawn Hang'd and Quartered The Trial of Stephen Colledg Carpenter at the Court-House in the City of Oxford on Wednesday August 17th 1681. Present Lord Norreys Present Ld. Chief Justice North. Present Mr. Justice Jones Present Mr. Justice Raymund Present Mr. Justice Levyns HIS Indictment was for High-Treason in Conspiring the Death of the King the Levying of War and the Subversion of the Government Which being read he desired â—…py of the Indictment and of the Jury that 〈◊〉 to pass upon him and that he might have Counsel assigned him to advise him Whether he had not something in Law pleadable in Bar of this Indictment Desiring also to know upon what Statute he was Indicted and that his Papers which contained Directions for his Defence might be restor'd him which were taken from him just before he was brought to Court Which he much insisting on the Court demanding an Account from him where he had those Papers He told them that he had them not all from one Person they were received from his own hands some of them in the Tower and being brought back to him they were taken away from him He then again was urg'd to plead which after many and earnestly repeated Intreaties for his Papers he did Not Guilty Then Mr. Attorney General gave the Court an Account concerning his Papers that when he came to Prison he had none but that Mr. Aaron Smith the Messenger inform'd him deliver'd them to him Wherefore the Papers being perused and most of them disallowed by the Court Mr. Smith and Mr. Starkey were called the latter did not appear but the former did who being demanded if he gave Mr. Colledge those Papers refused to accuse himself and so the Court took a Recognizance of 100 l. of him to attend the Court during the Session And Mr. Henry Starkey was sent for to be took up the Goaler swearing against him that he would have bribed him with four Guinies to be favourable to Colledge which he refused And the Papers what was not judg'd scandalous to the Government of them were ordered to be delivered to the Sheriff's Son for Mr. Colledge's perusal and the use of the King's Attorney as he thought fit Then the Court was adjourn'd till Two in the Afternoon When being met again Proclamation was made for Attendance and for the Under-Sheriff to return his Jury Whereof Richard Croke Thomas Marsh Edward Aryes VVilliam Aryes Richard Aryes Richard Dutton John Nash and VVilliam VVebb were challenged by the Prisoner Thomas Martin did not appear and Gabriel Merry being almost 100 Years of Age was excused Those therefore which served were Henry Standard William Bigg Robert Bird. John Shorter William Windlow Charles Hobbs Roger Browne Timothy Doyley Ralph VVallis John Benson John Piercy John Lawrence To whom the Indictment being read Mr. North and Mr. Attorney General proceded to open the Charge the latter being several times interrupted by the Prisoner not failing to reprove him home for so doing Then the first Witness produced against him was Mr. Stephen Dugdale who deposed That he having been acquainted with Mr. Colledge about two Years had oft heard him rail against the King saying That he was a Papist