to you in Laâ—iâ—e which was denyed in the Case of Sir Henry Vane And there is a later Case known to most persons here By the opinion of all the Judges of England a Copy of the Indictment was denyed to my Lord Russel Therefore arraign him upon the Indictment we must not spend our time in discourses to captivate the people Col. Sid. Is not this a good Law my Lord Holding out the Paper L. C. J. You have the rule of the Court. Mr. Just. Wythens Any thing the Law will allow you you shall have but I am sure if you did advise with your Counsel they must tell you the same thing So the Clerk of the Crown called the Jury and after several Challenges the names of the Jury were as follow The Jury Iohn Amger Richard White William Linn Lawrence Wood. Adam Andrews Emery Arguise Iosias Clerke George Glisby Nicholas Baxter William Reeves William Grove Iohn Burt. L. C. J. Look you Gentlemen of the Jury there are some Gentlemen at the Bar as we are informed are apt to whisper to the Jury 't is no part of their duty nay 't is against their duty and therefore Gentlemen if you hear any of them by you that offer to whisper or make Comments in this Cause as you are upon your Oaths and I doubt not but will do your duty between the King and the Prisoner so I expect if you hear the Counsel say any thing you will inform the Court. Let us have no Remarks but a fair Tryal in God's Name Cl. of Cr. You that are sworn look upon the Prisoner and hearken to his Cause He stands indicted by the Name of Algernon Sidney of c. as in the Indictment your Charge is to inquire c. Then Proclamation for Evidence was made Mr. Dolben May it please your Lordship and you Gentlemen that are sworn This is an Indictment of High Treason preferred against Algernon Sidney the Prisoner at the Bar. The Indictment sets forth That he as a false Traitor against our most Illustrious Prince Charles the Second his natural Lord not having the fear of God in his heart and on the Thirtieth of June in the Thirty Fifth Year of the King and divers other days and times as well before as after in the Parish of St. Giles in the Fields in the County of Middlesex traiterously with divers Traitors unknown did conspire the Death of the King and to levy War within this Kingdom And to complete these Traiterous Purposes did then and there maliciously advisedly and traiterously send one Aaron Smith into Scotland to excite some ill disposed persons of that Kingdom to come into this and to consult with the said Algernon Sidney and other Traitors of and upon assistance from the Kingdom of Scotland to carry on those Designs And the Indictment sets forth further that to perswade the people of England it was lawful to raise Rebellion the said Algernon Sidney did cause to be written a false Seditious Libel in which is contained these English Words The Power is originally in the People and that is delegated to the King The King is subject to the Law of God as a King as a man to the people that made him a King In as much as he is a King the Law sets a measure to that Objection c. put in the Indictment This is laid to be against the duty of his Allegiance against the peace of the King his Crown and Dignity and against the Form of the Statute in that Case made and provided If we prove him guilty we doubt not but you will find it Mr. Att. Gen. My Lord and you Gentlemen of the Jury the Prisoner at the Bar stands indicted of the highest Crimes the conspiring the Death of the King and the Overthrow of the English Monarchy Gentlemen we shall use this Method in our Evidence We shall shew by many Witnesses that there was a design of raising and making a Rebellion within this Kingdom For Gentlemen you must take notice and I think there is no English Man but does believe that for several years last past a design was laid and for that purpose several secret Insinuations were made use of and publick Libels spread abroad to perswade the people that the King was introducing Arbitrary Power that he subverted all their Rights Liberties Properties and whatever was dear to them They indeavoured to make the world believe the King was a Papist And when Gentlemen by such Stratagems they had worked upon many incautelous persons when they thought they had gotten a sufficient party then there was a design of an open rising for they thought all things were ripened and that was to be in several parts of the Kingdom Some persons to effect this design were for a present Assassination of the King Others would do it in a more fair and gentile way They thought it below persons of that great Quality as the Prisoner is and therefore were for doing it by open Force When we have given that general Evidence we shall then come to shew you what share and part the Prisoner had in this Design For certainly he was looked upon as a very eminent person whose Education abroad and former practices at home had rendred him fit to advise and proceed in such Affairs We shall prove when these matters were ripe this Gentleman was of the Council of State of the Six that were to manage this matter of the Rising We shall shew the several Consultations they held one at Mr. Hambden's House another at the House of my Lord Russel There we shall acquaint you what Debates they had for they acted like very subtil Men and there they debated whether the Rising should be first in the Country or City or both together They came to a resolution it should be in both places at once Then when they had asserted that point they come to consider the time of Rising and upon that they thought fit to call in Aid of Scotland first and that was this Gentleman's particular Province For he being a man of great Secresie was to send an Emissary into that Kingdom and invite some persons over totreat with them about it We shall prove that an Emissary was sent and this Gentleman gave him a considerable Sum to bear his Charges We shall prove that several Scotch Gentlemen in pursuance of this Resolve came here to treat with this great Council of State about this Affair And shall make it appear to you that assoon as ever the least Discovery of this Plot was these persons concealed themselves and withdrew as the rest of the Plotters that have fled from Justice Gentlemen this was not enough for this Gentleman to consult on these several Passages but to demonstrate to the World that his Head and Heart was intire in this Service and that he might carry it on the more effectually he was at this very time when this Emissary was gone into Scotland preparing a most Seditious and Traiterous
him to make an Address to the King This Gentlemen I repeat not that it is material but for no other reason than because Colonel Sidney had produced it and so we are to think he intended to make some use of it but I can't see any inference to be drawn from it There is one Witness more and that is Mr. Blake to the credit of my Lord Howard who comes here and says that when he discoursed about a Pardon My Lord should say That he had a Warrant for his Pardon but that he had not yet passed it and could not yet and he apprehended the reason was because the drudgery of Swearing was not over But this is but what my Lord Howard had conjectured First it does not appear that there is any promise of Pardon at all to my Lord Howard on any terms imposed on him In the next place whatever expectation he has of a Pardon he can't reasonably hope for it without making a clear discovery of all he knows For to stifle his Evidence he has given is not a way to deserve a Pardon of his Prince Therefore Gentlemen whatever expressions were used tho he called it the drudgery of Swearing however unwilling he is to come to it and tho he gives it very many hard names and might think it very harsh to come and own himself to be one of the Conspirators it might be irksome and very irksome yet none of them tell you That my Lord Howard should say that what he had said was not true Now he has come and given his Evidence and you have heard all these objections against it and not one of them touch it in the least I come in the next place to the other part of the Evidence The Papers found in Colonel Sidney's House And in the first place he objects They can't affect him for says he there is no proof they were found in my House no proof they were written by me for comparison of Hands that is nothing and if they were proved to be mine 't is nothing at all to the purpose they are an Answer to a Polemical Discourse wherewith he entertained himself privately in his Study Why you have observed I know that Sir Philip Lloyd in the first place swears that by Warrant from the Secretary he searched his House and he found the Papers lying upon Colonel Sidney's Table in his Study when he came in there and there is no ground nor colour for you to suspect otherwise than that they were there and he found them there For the surmise of the Prisoner at the Bar that they might besaid there 't is so forein and without ground that by and by you will think there is nothing at all in it In the next place we prove Colonel Sidney's Hand and that by as much proof as the thing is capable of such a proof as in all cases hath been allowed and that is for men to come that know and are acquainted with the Hand-writing and Swear they know his Hand-writing and they believe this to be his Hand You have heard from Mr. Sheppard a man that used to transact business for him pay mony for him and Mr. Cooke and Mr. Cary men of known Credit in the City of London that have had the like dealings with Colonel Sidney and they Swear this is his Hand-writing as they verily Believe So that Gentlemen this proof to you of Colonel Sidney's Hand-writing does verifie Sir Philip Lloyd That these Papers must be found there if Colonel Sidney writ them and then this being found that they were writ by him the next thing will be How far this will be an Evidence to prove his compassing and imagining the Death of the King Compassing and imagining the Death of the King is the Act of the mind and is Treason whilst it remains secret in the Heart tho no such Treason can be punish'd because there is no way to prove it but when once there is any Overt Act that is any thing that does manifest and declare such intention then the Law 〈…〉 nd punishes it as High Treason Now after this Evidence I think no man will doubt whether it was in the heart of the Prisoner at the Bar to destroy the King But first he objects That this is a part of a Book and unless you take the whole nothing can be made of it As it is in wresting of Texts of Scripture says he you may as well say That David says there is no God because David hath said The fool hath said in his heart there is no God But Gentlemen the application won't hold for you see a long Discourse hath been read to you a continued thred of Argument 't is not one Proposition but an whole series of Argument These are the Positions That the King derives all his Power from the People That 't is originally in the People and that the measure of Subjection must be adjudged by the Parliament and if the King does fall from doing his Duty he must expect the People will exact it And this he has laid down as no way prejudicial to him for says he The King may refuse the Crown if he does not like it upon these terms But says he if he does accept it he must expect the performance will be exacted or revenge taken by those he hath botray'd Then next he sets up an objection and then argues against it Ay but shall the People be judg in their own Cause And thus he answers it It must be so for is not the King a Judg in his own Cause How can any man else be Tried or Convicted of any Offence if the King may not be Judg in his own Cause for to judg by a mans self or by his Deputy is the same thing and so a Crime against the King can't be punished And then he takes notice of it as a very absurd Position That the King shall judg in his own Cause and not the People That would be to say The Servant entertained by the Master shall judg the Master but the Master shall not judg the Servant Gentlemen after this sort of Argument he comes to this setled Position We may therefore says he change or take away Kings without breaking any Yoke or that is made a Yoke the injury is therefore in imposing the Yoke and there can be none at all in breaking of it But he goes on in his Book and that is by way of Answer to an Objection That if there be no injury yet there may be inconvenience if the headless multitude should shake off the Yoke But says he I would sain know how the multitude comes to be headless and there he gives you many instances in Story and from Forein Nations he comes home to the English and tells you how all Rebellions in later Ages have been headed and tells you the Parliament is the Head or the Nobility and Gentry that compose it and when the King fails in his Duty the People may
call it The Multitude therefore is never headless but they either find or create an head so that here is a plain and an avowed Principle of Rebellion Established upon the strongest reason he has to back it Gentlemen This with the other Evidence that has been given will be sufficient to prove his Compassing the Death of the King You see the Affirmations he makes when Kings do break their Trust they may be called to accompt by the people This is the Doctrine he Broaches and Argues for He says in his Book in another part that the Calling and Dissolving of Parliaments is not in the Kings Power Gentlemen You all know how many Parliaments the King hath Called and Dissolved if it be not in his Power he hath done that that was not in his Power and so contrary to his Trust. Gentlemen at the entrance into this Conspiracy they were under an apprehension that their Liberties were invaded as you hear in the Evidence from my Lord Howard that they were just making the Insurrection upon that Tumultuous opposition of Electing of Sheriffs in London They enter into a Consultation to raise Arms against the King and it is proved by my Lord Howard that the Prisoner at the Bar was one Gentlemen Words spoken upon a supposition will be High Treason as was held in King James's time in the Case of Collins in Rolls Reports The King being Excommunicate may be Deposed and Murdered without affirming he was Excommunicated and this was enough to Convict him of High Treason Now according to that Case to say the King having broken his Trust may be Deposed by his people would be High Treason but here he does as good as affirm the King had broke his Trust. When every one sees the King hath Dissolved Parliaments this reduces it to an Affirmation And though this Book be not brought to that Counsel to be perused and there debated yet it will be another and more than two Witnesses against the Prisoner For I would ask any man suppose a man was in a Room and there were two men and he talks with both apart and he comes to one and endeavours to persuade him that it is lawful to Rise in Arms against the King if so be he break his Trust and he should go to another man and tell him the King hath broken his Trust and we must seek some way to redress our selves and persuade the people to Rise these two Witnesses do so tack this Treason together that they will be two Witnesses to prove him Guilty of High Treason And you have heard one Witness prove it positively to you That he consulted to Rise in Arms against the King and here is his own Book says it is lawful for a man to Rise in Arms against the King if he break his Trust and in effect he hath said the King hath broken his Trust Therefore this will be a sufficient demonstration what the imagination of the Heart of this man was that it was nothing but the destruction of the King and the Government and indeed of all Governments There can be no such thing as Government if the people shall be Judg in the Case For what so uncertain as the heady and giddy Multitude Gentlemen I think this will be a sufficient Evidence of his Consulting the death of the King You have here the Prisoner at the Bar that is very deep in it Indeed some men may by Passion be transported into such an Offence and though the Offence be never the less what ever the motives are yet in some it is less dangerous for those that venture upon Passion to raise Commotions and Rebellion are not always so much upon their Guard but that they may make some false steps to intrap themselves But this Gentleman proceeds upon a surer Foundation it is his Reason it is his Primciple it is the Guide of all his Actions it is that by which he leads and directs the steady Course of his Life A man convinced of these Principles and that walks accordingly what won't he do to accomplish his designs How wary will he be in all his Actions Still reasoning with himself which way to bring it most securely about Gentlemen This is the more dangerous Conspiracy in this man by how much the more it is rooted in him and how deep it is you hear when a man shall write as his Principle that it is lawful for to depose Kings they breaking their Trust and that the Revolt of the whole Nation can not be called Rebellion It will be a very sad Case when people Act this according to their Consciences and do all this for the good of the people as they would have it thought but this is the Principle of this man Gentlemen We think we have plainly made it out to you and proved it sufficiently that it was the imagination of his Heart to destroy the King and made sufficient proof of High Treason Coll. Sidney Give me leave my Lord to say a very few words I desire Mr. Solicitor would not think it his Duty to take away mens lives any how First We have had a long story Lord Chief Iustice. Nay Mr. Sidney We must not have vying and revying I asked you before what you had to say the course of Evidence is after the Kings Counsel have concluded we never admit the Prisoner to say any thing Coll. Sidney My Lord It was a wise man said there never could be too much delay in the Life of a man I know the Kings Counsel may conclude if they please Mr. Solicitor I would not have him think that it is enough by one way on another to bring a man to death My Lord This matter of Sir Henry Vane is utterly misrepresented Lord Chief Iustice. I must tell you Gentlemen of the Jury that what the Prisoner says that is not proved and what the Kings Counsel have said of which there is no proof to make it out must not be taken into any consideration Coll. Sidney Then my Lord here is a place or two in Old Hales turning over my Lord Hales Book for the Overt Act of one Treason not being an Overt Act of another your Lordship knows Coke and Hales were both against it he Reads Compassing by bare words is not an Overt Act Conspiring to Levy War is no Overt Act. Mr. Solicitor General I desire but one word more for my own sake as well as the Prisoners and that is that if I have said any thing that is not Law or misrepeated or misapplied the Evidence which hath been given I do make it my humble Request to your Lordship to rectifie those mistakes as well in point of Fact as point of Law for God forbid the Prisoner should suffer by any mistake Lord Chief Iustice. Gentlemen The Evidence has been long and it is a Cause of great concernment and it is far from the thoughts of the King or from the thoughts or desire of any of his Judges here to be
Parliament or the Nobility and Gentry that composed it and when the Kings failed of their Duties by their own Authority called it The multitude therefore is not ever headless but doth either find or create heads unto it self as occasion doth requite and whether it be one man or a few or more for a short or a longer time we see nothing more regular than its motions But they may saith our Author shake off the Yoke and why may they not if it prove uneasie or hurtful unto them Why should not the Israelites shake off the Yoke of Pharaoh Jabin Sisera and others that oppressed them When pride had changed Nebuchadnezzar into a beast what should perswade the Assyrians not to drive him out amongst Beasts until God had restored unto him the Heart of a Man When Tarquin had turned the Legal Monarchy of Rome into a most abominable Tyranny why should they not abolish it And when the Protestants of the Low-Countries were so grievously oppressed by the power of Spain under the proud cruel and savage conduct of the Duke of Alva why should they not make use of all the means that God had put into their hands for their deliverance Let any Man who sees the present state of the Provinces that then united themselves judge whether it is better for them to be as they are or in the condition unto which his fury would have reduced them unless they had to please him renounced God and their Religion Our Author may say they ought to have suffered The King of Spain by their resistance lost those Countries and that they ought not to have been Judges in their own case To which I answer That by resisting they laid the foundation of many Churches that have produced multitudes of men eminent in gifts and Graces and established a most glorious and happy Commonwealth that hath been since its first beginning the strongest Pillar of the Protestant Cause now in the World and a place of refuge unto those who in all parts of Europe have been oppressed for the name of Christ Whereas they had slavishly and I think I may say wickedly as well as foolishly suffered themselves to be butchered if they had left those empty Provinces under the power of Anti Christ where the name of God is no otherwise known than to be blasphemed If the King of Spain desired to keep his Subjects he should have governed them with more justice and mercy when contrary unto all Laws both Humane and Divine he seeks to destroy those he ought to have preserved he can blame none but himself if they deliver themselves from his tyranny and when the matter is brought to that That He must not reign or they over whom he would reign must perish the matter is easily decided as if the question had been asked in the time of Nero or Domitian Whether they should be left at liberty to destroy the best part of the World as they endeavoured to do or it should be rescued by their destruction And as for the peoples being Judges in their own case it is plain they ought to be the only Judges because it is their own and only concerns themselves Mr. Att. Gen. The latter end the last sheet of all § 35. L. C. J. The argument runs through the book fixing the power in the people Cl. of the Cr. The general revolt of a Nation from its own Magistrates can never be called rebellion Mr. Att. Gen. § 37. Cl. of Cr. The power of calling and dissolving Parliaments is not in the King Mr. Att. Gen. So much we shall make use of if the Colonel please to have any other part read to explain it he may Then the Sheets were shewn to Col. Sidney Colonel Sidney I do not know what to make of it I can read it L. C. J. Ay no doubt of it better than any man here Fix on any part you have a mind to have read Colonel Sidney I do not know what to say to it to read it in pieces thus L. C. J. I perceive you have disposed them under certain heads To what heads will you have read Colonel Sidney My Lord let him give an account of it that did it Mr. Att. Gen. My Lord we will not delay Colonel Sidney from entring on his defence only we have this piece of Evidence to give further One of his Complices was my Lord Russel we will give in Evidence his Conviction We will only ask my Lord Howard Was your Lordship sworn as a Witness at the Tryal of my Lord Russel L. Howard Yes Mr. Att. Gen. Whether or no when you met were there in those debates any reflections upon the King that he had broken his duty L. Howard Not that I remember Mr. Att. Gen. Why would you rise L. Howard If you mean upon the misgovernment not personally upon the King Mr. Att. Gen. Ay. L. Howard Yes and principally and chiefly that which we thought was the general disgust of the Nation the imposing upon the City at that time Mr. Iust. Wythins That was complained of at that time L. Howard Yes my Lord We took it all along to be the chief grievance L. Ch. Iust. Have you any more Witnesses Mr. Att. Gen. Only the Record Mr. Sol. Gen. I know there is no time mispent to make things clear If the Jury have a mind to have the words read again L. Ch. Iust. If they have a mind let it Then Mr. Trinder was Sworn and testified it to be a true Copy of the Record and said he examined it at Fishmongers-Hall with Mr. Tanner Then the Record of the Conviction of the Lord Russel was read L. Ch. Iust. What will you go to next Mr. Attorney Mr. Sol. Gen. We have done unless the Jury desire to have the words of the Libel read again But they did not Col. Sidney My Lord I desire to know upon what Statute I am Indicted Mr. Att. Gen. My Lord I will give as plain an Answer You are Indicted upon the old Statute of 25 E. 3. Col. Sidney Then I desire to know upon what branch of that Statute Mr. Att. Gen. Why I will acquaint you 'T is upon the first branch of that Statute for Conspiring and Compassing the Death of the King Col. Sidney Then I conceive what does not come within that does not touch me Mr. Att. Gen. Make what Inferences you please Colonel we will answer you Col. Sidney I desire to know what the Witnesses have sworn against me upon that point Mr. Att. Gen. Go on You have heard the Witnesses as well as we L. Ch. Iust. He says You are Indicted upon the Statute of 25 E. 3. which Statute makes it High Treason to Conspire the Death of the King and the Overt Act is sufficiently set forth in the Indictment now the Question is whether 't is proved Col. Sidney They have proved a Paper found in my Study of Caligula and Nero that is Compassing the Death of the King is it L. C. J.
instrumental to take away the life of any man that by Law his Life ought not to be taken away For I had rather many Guilty men should escape than one innocent man suffer The question is whether upon all the Evidence you have heard against the Prisoner and the Evidence on his behalf there is Evidence sufficient to Convict the Prisoner of the High Treason he stands charged with And as you must not be moved by the denyal of the Prisoner further than as it is backed with proof so you are not to be inveigled by any insinuations made against the Prisoner at the Bar further or otherwise than as the proof is made out to you But it is usual and it is a duty incumbent on the King's Counsel to urge against all such Criminals whatsoever they observe in the Evidence against them and likewise to endeavour to give answers to the Objections that are made on their behalf And therefore since we have been kept so long in this Cause it won't be amiss for me and my Brothers as they shall think fit to help your memory in the fact and discharge that Duty that is incumbent upon the Court as to the points of Law This Indictment is for High Treason and is grounded upon the Statute of 25 E. 3. By which Statute the compassing and imagining the death of the King and declaring the same by an Overt Act is made High Treason The reason of that Law was because at Common Law there was great doubt what was Treason wherefore to reduce that High Crime to a certainty was that Law made that those that were Guilty might know what to expect And there are several Acts of Parliament made between the time of Edward the Third and that of 1 M. but by that Statute all Treasons that are not enumerated by after Acts of Parliament remain as they were declared by that Statute of 25 E. 3. And so are Challenges and other matters insisted upon by the Prisoner left as they were at the time of that Act I am also to tell you that in point of Law it is not only the Opinion of us here but the Opinion of them that sate before us and the Opinion of all the Judges of England and within the memory of many of you That tho there be Two Witnesses required to prove a man Guilty of High-Treason yet it is not necessary there should be Two Witnesses to the same thing at one time But if two Witnesses prove two several Facts that have a tendency to the same Treason they are two Witnesses sufficient to convict any man of High-Treason In the Case of my Lord Stafford in Parliament all the Judges assisting it is notoriously known That one Witness to a Conspiracy in England and another to a Conspiracy in France were held two Witnesses sufficient to convict him of High-Treason In the next place I am to tell you That tho some Judges have been of Opinion that words of themselves were not an Overt Act but my Lord Hales nor my Lord Coke nor any other of the Sages of the Law ever questioned but that a Letter would be an Overt Act sufficient to prove a man Guilty of High-Treason For scribere est agere Mr. Sidney says The King is a Politick Person but you must destroy Him in His natural capacity or it is not Treason but I must tell If any man compass to Imprison the King it is High Treason so was the Case of my Lord Cobham and my Lord Coke When he says If a man do attempt to make the King do any thing by force and compulsion otherwise than he ought to do that it is High-Treason within that Act of 25 Eliz. III. But if it were an Indictment only for the Levying of War there must be an actual War Levied but this is an Indictment for compassing the Death of the King and the other Treason mentioned in that Act of Parliament for the Levying War may be given in Evidence to prove the Conspiracy the Kings Death For 't is rightly told you by the Kings Council That the imagination of a mans heart is not to be discerned but if I declare such my imagination by an Overt Act which Overt Act does naturally Evince that the King must be Deposed Destroyed Imprisoned or the like it will be sufficient Evidence of Treason within that Act. In the next place having told you what the Law is for Gentlemen 't is our Duty upon our Oaths to declare the Law to you and you are bound to receive our Declaration of the Law and upon this Declaration to inquire whether there be a Fact sufficiently proved to find the Prisoner Guilty of the High-Treason of which he stands Indicted And for that I must tell you what ever happens to be hearsay from others it is not to be applied immediately to the Prisoner but however those Matters that are remote at first may serve for this purpose To prove there was generally a Conspiracy to Destroy the King and Government And for that matter you all remember it was the constant rule and method observed about the Popish Plot first to produce the Evidence of the Plot in general This was done in that famous Caâ—e of my Lord Stafford in Parliament Gentlemen I am also to tell you This alone does not at all affect the Prisoner at the Bar but is made use of as a circumstance to support the credibility of the Witnesses and is thus far applicable to the business before you That 't is plain by persons that don't touch the Prisoner at the Bar and I am sorry any man makes a doubt of it at this time of day that there was a Conspiracy to kill the King for after so full a proof in this place and in others and the Execution and Confession of several of the Offenders I am surprised to observe that the Prisoner at the Bar and some others present seem not to believe it But Gentlemen you hear the first Witness I speak of West He tells you he had the honour to be acquainted with Mr. Sidney and that he had Discourse with Walcot a person Convicted and Executed for this horrid Conspiracy Why says he he told me at my Chamber That they were not only the persons concerned but that there were other persons of great Quality that had their Meetings for the carrying on the Business in other places And Ferguson that was the Ring leader in this Conspiracy told him there was a Design of a general Insurrection it was once laid down but it is now taken up again There are other Councellors of great importance and he names among the rest the Prisoner at the Bar. Mr. West goes a little further and he tells you this says he He did not only tell me so but that there was a Design to conciliate a Correspondence with some persons in Scotland and they were to do it under the Cant of having business in Carolina There is Mr. Keeling he tells
believe that that was Coll. Sidney's Book writ by him no man can doubt but it is a sufficient Evidence that he is Guilty of Compassing and Imagining the Death of the King and let us consider what proof can be greater than what has been given of it Mr. Sheppard an intimate acquaintance of his that has seen him write he looks upon the hand and says He is extreamly acquainted with the hand and says He I believe in my Conscience this Book is Coll. Sidney's hand Gent. Do you expect Mr. Sidney would call a Witness to be by to see him write that Book In the next place you have two Trades-men Coke and Cary and they tell you one had seen him write once the other had seen his hand writing and they both believe it his Hand writing and they have good reason for they have paid several summs of Money upon Notes which they took as well as This to be his Hand writing Gentlemen Besides that give me leave to tell you here is another thing that makes it more plain This very Book is found in Colonel Sidney's House on the Table in his Study where he used to write by a Gentleman against whom Colonel Sidney can't make the least Objection and that there was that fairness offered by the Gentleman Pray Colonel put your Seal upon it that you may see that no injury be done you but Mr. Sidney would not do it Therefore he Seals them with his own Seal and carries them to White-hall where they were broken open and Sweares that those Papers were found in his Closet whereof this was one Another thing which I must take notice of to you in this Case is to mind you how this Book contains all the Malice and Revenge and Treason that Mankind can be guilty of It fixes the sole Power in the Parliament and the People so that he carries on the Design still for their Debates at their Meetings were to that purpose And such Doctrines as these suit with their Debates for there a general Insurrection was designed and that was discoursed of in this Book and incouraged They must not give it an ill Name It must not be called a Rebellion it being the general Act of the People The King it says is responsible to them the King is but their Trustee That he had betrayed his Trust he had misgoverned and now he is to give it up that they may be all Kings themselves Gentlemen I must tell you I think I ought more than ordinarily to press this upon you because I know the Misfortune of the late unhappy Rebellion and the bringing the late Blessed King to the Scaffold was first begun by such kind of Principles They cried He had betrayed the Trust that was delegated to him from the People Gentlemen in the next place because he is afraid their Power alone won't do it he endeavours to poison Mens Judgments and the way he makes use of he colours it with Religion and quotes Scripture for it too and you know how far that went in the late times How we were for binding our King in Chains and our Nobles in Fetters of Iron Gentlemen This is likewise made use of by him to stir up the People to Rebellion Gentlemen if in case the Prisoner did design the Deposing the King the removing the King and if in order thereunto he be guilty of Conspiring to Levy War or as to the Letter writ by my Lord Russel if he was privy to it these will be Evidences against him So that 't is not upon two but 't is upon greater Evidence then 22 if you believe this Book was writ by him Next I must tell you Gentlemen upon I think a less Testimony an Indictment was preferred against the late Lord Russel and he was thereupon Convicted and Executed of which they have brought the Record These are the Evidences for the King For the Prisoner he hath made several Objections As that there was no War Levied For that Gentlemen at the beginning of the Cause I told you what I took the Law to be and I take it to be so very plainly But Gentlemen as to the Credibility of my Lord Howard he offers you several Circumstances First He offers you a Noble Lord my Lord Anglescy who says That he attending my Lord of Bedford upon the misfortune of the Imprisonment of his Son after he had done my Lord Howard came to second that part of a Christians Office which he had performed and told him he had a very good Son and he knew no harm of him and as to the Plot he knew nothing of it Another Noble Lord my Lord Clare tells you that he had some Discourse with my Lord Howard and he said that if he were accused he thought they would but tell Noses and his business was done Then Mr. Philip Howard he tells you how he was not so intimate with him as others but he often came to his Brothers and that he should say he knew nothing of a Plot nor did he believe any but at the same time he said he believed there was a Sham Plot and then he pressed him about the business of the Address but that now my Lord of Essex was out of Town and so it went off Another thing Mr. Sidney took notice of says he 't is an Act of Revenge in my Lord Howard for he owes him a Debt that he does besides by his Allegation does not appear Col. Sid. My Lord he hath confessed it L. Ch. Iust. Admit it yet in case Collonel Sidney should be Convicted of this Treason the Debt accrues to the King and he can't be a Farthing the better for it But how does it look like Revenge I find my Lord Howard when he speaks of Collonel Sidney says he was more beholding to him than any body and was more sorry for him so says my Lord Clare Gentlemen You have it likewise offered that he came to Collonel Sidney's House and there he was desirous to have the Plate and Goods removed to his House and that he would assist them with his Coach and Coachman to carry them thither and did affirm that he knew nothing of the Plot and did not believe Collonel Sidney knew any thing and this is likewise proved by a couple of Maid Servants as well as the French Man You have likewise some thing to the same purpose said by my Lord Paget and this is offered to take off the Credibility of my Lord Howard Do you believe because my Lord Howard did not tell them I am in a Conspiracy to kill the King therefore he knew nothing of it he knew these Persons were Men of Honour and would not be concerned in any such thing But do you think because a Man goes about and denies his being in a Plot therefore he was not in it Nay it seems so far from being an Evidence of his Innocence that 't is an Evidence of his Guilt What should provoke a Man to discourse after