I have given their Lordships satisfaction in all points and need to give no further Evidence I acknowledge I did go at that time privately a By-Road by the name of Brown as for Jones I appeal to him himself and call God to witness I never saw the Man before now in my Life All that has been said against me except what this Fellow Saxon testifies is but Hear-say nay indeed but Hear-say upon Hear-say at the third and fourth Hand It is at the pleasure of any two Men in the World to take away the Lives Honours Estates of any of your Lordships if it be a proof sufficient to make you guilty of Treason for them to swear you were intended to be drawn into Treason Upon the whole matter my Lords I must leave my Case to the consideration of your Lordships I am not Master of so much Law or Rhetorick as the Kings Council to plead in my own Cause But I hope what Evidence I have offered has given your Lordship full satisfaction that I am not Guilty of what I stand charged with My Lords I would beg you to consider this that if I with those other two Gentlemen that he has named had had any transactions of this kind with such a Fellow as Saxon so as at first sight to put such large confidence in him Can it be imagined I so little regarded my own Life and all that is dear to me as to have surrender'd my self were it not that I was certain of my own innocence and integrity Life it self my Lords is to be preferred above all things but Honour and Innocence and Job saith Skin for Skin and all that a Man hath will he give for his Life and why should I be presumed to have so little a value for it as voluntarily to deliver up my self to destruction had I been Conscious that there was any one who could really testifie any thing that could hurt me Besides my Lords This very Fellow Saxon is but one Evidence and surely one Witness will never be sufficient to convict a Man of Treason tho' thousands of Hear-says and such trivial circumstances be tack'd to it especially when tack'd to an evidence which I dare say your Lordships are far from thinking it deserves credit Would not any of your Lordships think himself in a very bad Condition as to his Fortune if he could produce no better Evidence to prove his Title to his Estate than what has been now produced against me to take away my Life and if such Evidence as this would not be sufficient to support a Title to an Estate certainly it can never be thought sufficient to deprive a Man of Life Honour Estate and All. My Lords God knows how soon the Misfortune of a false Accusation may fall to the Lot of any of your Lordships since that may happen I question not but your Lordships will be very cautious how by an easie Credulity you give encouragement to such a Wickedness For Knights of the Post will not end in my Tryal if they prosper in their Villany and perhaps it may come home to some of your Lordships if such Practices be encouraged My Lords the Eyes of all the Nation are upon your Proceedings this day Nay I may say your Lordships are now judging the Cause of every Man in England that shall hereafter happen to come under the like Circumstances with my self For accordingly as you Judge of me now just so will Inferiour Courts be directed to give their Judgment in time to come Your Lordships very well know Blood once spilt can never be gather'd up again and therefore you I am sure will not hazard the sheding of my Blood upon a doubtful Evidence If it should be indifferent or but doubtful to your Lordships which upon my Proofs I cannot believe it can be whether I am Innocent or Guilty Both God and the Law require you to acquit me My Lords I leave my self My Cause and all the Consequences of it with your Lordships And I pray the All-wise the Almighty God to direct you in your determination Mr Solicitor General then said May it please your Grace and you my Noble Lords The Evidence against this Noble Lord is of two Natures part of it is positive Proof and part is Circumstantial and tho' it be allowed that there must be two Witnesses in cases of Treason and that Circumstances tho' never so strong to fortifie one positive proof cannot make a second positive Witness yet I crave leave to say that there may be Circumstances so strong cogent so violent and necessary to fortifie a positive Testimony That will in Law amount to make a second Witness such as the Law requires My Lords If a man comes and swears against another That he said he will go and kill the King and another Man that did not heare these words testifies his lying in wait That Circumstance of lying in wait that was an Action indifferent in it self when applied to the positive Proof will be a second Witness to satisfie the Law It is not my duty to carry the Evidence in this Case further than it will go and I am sure it is not my Duty to let it lose any of its Weight My Lord Our positive prooff is but one single Witness and that is Saxon Mr Solicitor then repeated his Evidence and went on saying This I must acknowledge standing single will make but one Witness but whether the Circumstances that have been offered by the other Witnesses be such violent Circumstances as necessarily tend to fortifie and support that positive Evidence and so will supply the defect of a second Witness is the next Question I come to consider Mr Solicitor then repeated the Evidence of the Lord Grey and Mr Jones how truly let any who will be at the trouble of reading the Tryal at large judge and proceeded saying Here my Lord is the main Circumstance that renders the matter suspitious But tho it was not observed in she whole Proceeding of the Tryal Vaux witnessed that my Lord sent to him and engaged him the 26th of May to go out of Town with him the next day That very night that Jones came to Town the 27th of May does my Lord Delamere at ten at Night go out of Town under the disguise of the Name of Brown and a By-Road into Cheshire this I say is the Circumstance that renders the thing suspitious But now my Lords comes the Question the main Question how it is made out that my Lord Delamere had notice Jones brought the Message from the Duke of Monmouth Jones indeed does not say that he imparted it to him But Story says that Brand who knew of the Message did acquaint him that my Lord had received it at the Coffee-House and that Night went out of Town It is true this is but a hear-say but that which followed being matter of Fact My Lord 's going out of Town that Night and in such an unusual suspitious
one is to the matter To the Form 1st The general Allegation that he was impeached de alta Proditione is uncertain it ought to have been particularly set out that the Court might judge Whether it be the same Crime and it is not helped by the Averrment 2dly Here is no Impeachment alledged to be upon Record They make a general Allegation that F. Harris was Impeached Impetitus fuit by the Commons before the Lords Quae quidem Impetitio in pleno robore existit prout per Recordum inde c. Now there is no Impeachment mentioned before And quae quidem Impetitio is a relative Clause and no Impeachment being mentioned before in the Plea there is nothing averred upon the Record to be continued or discontinued for Impetitio does not actively signifie the Impeaching or passively the Person Impeached but it signifies the Impeachment the Accusation which is to be upon Record Therefore when they say he was impeached and afterwards alledge Quae quidem Impetitio remains upon Record that cannot be good for the Relative there is only Illusive For the matter of the Plea 't is a Plea to the Jurisdiction of the Court There the point will be Whether a Suite depending even in a Superior Court can take away the Jurisdiction of an Inferiour Court which had an Original Jurisdiction of the Cause and of the Person at the time of the Fact committed I insist upon these Exceptions Mr Williams for the Prisoner then said I take these things to be admitted Mr Attorney having demurred generally 1. That the Prisoner stands Impeached 2. That the Impeachment is now in being 3. That this was done secundum Legem Consuetudiem Parliamenti and being so remains in plenis suis robore effectu And more particularly the Plea refers to the Record for the parts and Circumstances of the Impeachment prout patet per Record So that it refers the Impeachment to the Record and tells you 't is amongst the Records of that Parliament 4. Moreover That the Treason in the Impeachment and the Treason in the Indictment are one and the same and that this Person Fitz-Harris indicted and F. H. impeached are one and the same Person And withal it appears upon the Record that this Impeachment was depending before the Indictment found for the Parliament was the 21st of March and it appears this is an Indictment of this Term And further it appears not by any thing to the contrary in the Record but that this Parliament is still in being and then it must be admitted so to be Whether your Lordship now will think fit in this Court to proceed upon that Indictment is the substance of the Case I think it will not be denyed but that the Commons may Impeach any Commoner before the Lords That was the Case of Tresilian and Belknap in the time of Richard the second Vpon that Impeachment one of them was Executed and the other Banished in Parliament Mr Attorney allows the Parliament to be a Superior Court but says yet the Inferiour Court having Original Jurisdiction of the Person and Cause may proceed notwithstanding an Impeachment in Parliament I will shew how manifestly an Indictment and an Impeachment differ The Case of an Appeal is like the Case of an Impeachment An Appeal of Murder is at the suite of the Party and in this case 't is at the suite of the Commons t is not in the Name of the King but of all the Commons of England So that 't is like an Appeal and not like an Indictment an Indictment is for the King an Impeachment for the People It is not safe to alter the old ways of Parliament 't is out of the road of Comparisons when they will compare an Indictment and an Impeachment together It becomes not the Justice of this Court to weaken the Methods of Proceedings in Parliament Your proceeding upon this Indictment is to subject the Method of their Proceedings there to the Proceedings of this Court It is not fit that the Justice of the Kingdom and the High Court of Parliament should be crampt by the Methods of an Inferiour Court and a Jury The Parliament is the supreame Court and this Court every way inferiour to it and 't will be very strange that the Supreame Court should be hindred here For the highest Court is always supposed to be the wisest and the Commons in Parliament a greater and wiser Body than a Grand Jury of any one County And the Judges in that Court the Peers to be the Wisest Judges Will the Law of England suffer an Examination Impeachment and Prosecution for Treason to be taken out of the Hands of the greatest and wisest Inquest in England And will it suffer the Judicature to be taken out of the hands of the wisest Judges It stands not with the Wisdom of the Law or of the Constitution of the Government Another thing is this the common Argument in an extraordinary Case there is no Precedent for this way of Proceeding 'T is my Lord Cok's Argument 〈◊〉 Coke's Littleton fol. 108. and in the â—th Instit fol. 17. in the Case of the indictment against the Bishop of Winchester and of that against Mr Plowden He says 't is a dangerous attempt for Inferiour Courts to alter or meddle with the Law of Parliaments So in this case in regard it never was done from the beginning of the World till now it being without President there is no Law for it Another mischief which follows upon this is If you take this Case out of the power of the Parliament and bring it into this Court where the Offence may be pardoned you change the method of proceedings which make the Offence without consent of the Prosecutors not pardonable by Law This may be of dangerous consequence to the Publick by giving this Court a Jurisdiction and possessing it of these Causes expose them to the will of the Prince This way of proceeding inverts the Law in another thing 'T is a Principle that no man's Life is to be put twice in danger for the same thing If you proceed upon this Indictment and he be acquitted will that acquittal bind the Lords in Parliament If they may proceed upon the Impeachment then you invade every English-man's right and his Life may be brought in question twice upon the same account I take it to be a Critical thing now at this time to make such attempts as these are There are Lords now that lie under Impeachments of Treason if you goon in this do you not open a Gap that may be a ground to deliver them By the same Justice the Lords may be tryed by another Court This proceeding will have this effect it will stir up a Question between the Jurisdiction of this Court and the Parliament for in probability if this Person be acquirted the Commons and the Lords too will look into it If he be found guilty here is the Power of the Commons in Impeaching and the Jurisdiction of
and engaged to him the King should never let the Paper be seen and said this was the time to gain the King's favour It being long ago Mr Row declared these things as he believes and to the best of his Remembrance Mr Robert Yard being examined declared that the Advertisement concerning the Duke of M. which was put into the Gazete was what was handled in Council the day after the Duke came in It was the giving an Account of what passed betwixt the King and the Duke That he had the Paper either from the Lord Sunderland or Sr Leoline Jenkins John Hambden Esq declared himself thus His Case is so twisted with those of the Noble Persons whose Murders you enquire after that he knows not how to speak of theirs without relating his his own and that he looks upon himself almost as much murdered as any of them by reason of his Sufferings My Lord Russell and Col. Sidney were clap'd up in the Tower after which he was sent for and brought into the Cabinet Council or select number of Lords and askt whether he was of the Council of six so the Lord Howard was pleased to call it He saw there the King the Lord Keeper North and Lord Hallifax there were some others present whose faces he did not fee he does not remember a Clerk with them my Lord Keeper asked some Questions and so did the King He was pressed much to confess he claimed the Liberty as an English-man not to accuse himself he was sent to the Tower and made close Prisoner he was kept in the strictest custody for twenty Weeks when he had been there after the Lord R. was executed and a little before Col. Sidney was executed he had an intimation by a private note that there was an intention to try him for a Misdemeanour he was bailed out upon 30000 l. After this it happened the D. of M. came in and had a Pardon but several coming to see him he spoke some things freely which did not please the Court and at the Old Dutchess of Richmond 's he spoke as if those Gentlemen that were put to Death dyed unjustly Whereupon after the King was told this by a Lady he would have him confess his being concerned in the Plot and a Paper was drawn to that purpose which the King would have him sign which he did A Gentleman viz. Sr James Forbes came to him from the Duke with the Copy of the Paper the Duke had signed to own the Plot as soon as he saw it he said it was a Confession 〈◊〉 the Plot and according to the Law then in practise it would hang him because a Paper had been given in evidence against Col. Sidney upon which he was condemned for if a Paper which was said and not proved to be writ by him could supply the place of a second Evidence then a Paper which could be proved to be written and signed by the D. of M. might much more properly be made use of as his Evidence to hang other People He said he was told by Sr James Forbes that the D. was in a manner forced to do it and perswaded and overborne in it by the Lord H. when Sr James Forbes went back the D. was concerned to madness and said if he lived till next day he would have the Paper again and accordingly he went to the King and told him he could not rest till he had it The King with great indignation threw him the Paper and bid him never see his face more and he believes he did not and so the Duke went away and by that he escaped the Tryal then He was told by Mr Waller who is since dead that the Duke's owning the Plot to the King was the cause of Colonel Sidney's death for the King ballanced before He was after this brought to a Tryal for Misdemeanour and was convicted on the Lord Howard's evidence He pleaded Magna Charta that a Salvo Contenemento but the Court fined him 4000 l. and to Imprisonment till the Fine paid and security for the good Behaviour The King made his choice of putting him in Prison and he was committed to the Marshal's House in the King's Bench where he was ten Months He offered several summs of Money and they answered they had rather have him rot in Prison than he should pay the Fine After this they put him in the Common Prison where he was kept ten or eleven Months very close then they contrive a Writ called a long Writ to reach his Real and Personal Estate whilst he was thus a Prisoner After this he heard a new Witness appeared which was after the defeat of the Duke of Monmouth He was sent Close Prisoner to the Tower by the Lord Sunderland's Warrant and put into such a Room where he had no conveniency and with two of the Rudest Warders in the Tower to lie in the Room with him After seven or eight weeks he was removed to Newgate where he was kept close eleven weeks his Friends offered Money for his Pardon to some in power who were the Lord Jefferyes and Mr Petre the summ was 6000 l. and that was effectual It is not possible for a Man to suffer more than he did By the help of the Money on condition he would plead Guilty to his Indictment he was to come off His Friends advised him to it because it could hurt none there being none living of those called the Council of six but the Lord Howard Whereupon pleading guilty he was discharged paying 3 or 400 l. to Burton and Graham for the charge of his Pardon As for the Subject matter of what he confessed * The designing to rise in Arms to rescue the Laws and Liberties of his Country when threatned with destruction no man will think he ought to be ashamed that thinks my Lord Russell was Murdered And he said this was the way that our Ancestors always took when the Soveraign Authority came to so great a height as may be made out by many instances he said Custom had made this the Law of England and that all Civilized and well governed Nations about us had used the same way Notwithstanding his pleading Guilty he hath been very ready to secure the Kingdom and he was one of the two or three Men that received Letters from Holland of this Revolution And he saith he thinks King William's coming into England to be nothing else but the Continuation of the Council of six and if not he desires to be better informed Being asked by the Lord H. how he came to send his Wife to the Man whom he thought was instrumental in obtaining the Paper which he thought endangered his Life He answered did not he send his Wife to the Lord Jefferies Mr Petre and others who should he send to but to those in power and who could help him but those in power He did not think that the Lord H. struck directly at his Life or that his Lordship had any personal
advantage thereat and would not hear me when I had called to mind that which I am sure would have invalidated their Evidence and tho' he granted some things of the same nature to another yet he granted it not to me my Blood will be also found at the Door of the Vnrighteous Jury who found me Guilty upon the single Oath of an Outlawed man for there was none but his Oath about the Money who is no legal Witness tho' he be pardoned his outlawry not being recalled and also the Law requires two Witnesses in point of Life and then about my going with him to the place mentioned it was by his own Words before he could be Outlawed for it was two Months after his absconding and tho' in a Proclamation yet not high Treason as I have heard so that I am clearly murdered by you and also bloody Mr Atterbury who so insatiately hunted after my Life and tho' it is no profit to him yet through the ill-will he bore me left no Stone unturned as I have ground to believe until he brought me to this and shewed favour to Burton who ought to have dyed for his own Fault and not to have bought his Life with mine And lastly Richardson who is cruel and severe to all under my Circumstances and did at that time without all Mercy or Pity hasten my Sentence and held up my Hand that it might be pronounced all which together with the great one of all * * King James the second by whose Power all these and multitudes of more Cruelties are done I do heartily and freely forgive as done against me But as it s done in an implacable mind against the Lord Christ his Righteous Cause and Followers I leave it to him who is the Avenger of all such Wrongs and hath said I have raised up one from the North and he shall come upon Princes as upon Morter and as the Potter treadeth Clay Isa 41.25 He shall cut off the Spirit of Princes and be terrible to the Kings of the Earth Psal 76.12 And know this also that though you are seemingly fixed and because of the Power in your Hands and a weighing out your Violence and dealing with despightful Hand because of the old and new hatred by impoverishing and by every way distressing those you have got under you yet unless you secure Jesus Christ and his holy Augels you shall never do your business nor your Hands accomplish your Enterprizes for he will come upon you er'e you are aware and therefore O that you will be wise instructed and learn is the desire of her that finds no Mercy from you Elizabeth Gaunt Postscript SVch as it is you have it from her who hath done as she could O is sorry she can do not better hopes you will pitty and cover weakness shortnese and any thing that is wanting and begs that none may be weakned or humbled at the lowness of my Spirit for God's design is to humble and â—baseus that he aloâ—â— may be exalted in this day and I hope he will appear in the needful time and it may be reserved the best Wine tall last as he hath done for some before me none goâ—â—â— to Warfare at his own charge and the Spirit bloweth not only where but when it listeth and it becomes me who have so often grieved quenched and resisted it to wait for and upon the motions of the Spirit and not to murmur but I may mourn because through want of it I honour not my God nor his blessed Cause which I have so long loved and delighted to love and repent of nothing about it but that I served him and it no better Remarks upon the Tryal of Mr Joseph Hayes at the King 's Beath upon an Indictment of high Treason for corresponding with Sr Thomas Armstrong MR Hayes was brought by Habeas Corpus upon the 3d of November 1684 from the Gatâ—â—house and was arraigned upon an Indictment to this effect viz. That he being a false Traytor against the King c the 31st of August in the 31th Year of the King knowing Sr Thomas Armstrong to have constired the death of the King and to have sted for the same did traytorously relieve comfort and maintain him and for his Relief and Maintenance did pay the sum of 150 l. against the duty of his Allegiance c. To this he pleaded Not Guilty Upon the 21st of November 1684 He was brought to Tryal before the Lord Chief Justice Jeffryes Judge Holloway Judge Wythens and Judge Walcot and the Jury being called he prudently challenged the following Persons which if he had not done it is more than probable that he had dyed as poor Colledge did at Oxford Sr Thomas Griffith Richard Ellis Thomas Langham Henry Whistler Nicholas Smyth Thomas Soper Tho. Passenger Henry Minchard Peter Jones William Crowch Peter Devet Henry Lodes William Pownes Charles Gregory William Peele Richard Weedon Thomas Pory Tho. Peircehouse Richard Burden John George John Steventon Robert Watkins George Twine Thomas Short Robert Townshend James Bush Walter Mastors Thomas Larkham Edward Cooke William Fashion John Flowerdew John Greens John Grice Charles Fowler and James Smyth In all 35. The Jury sworn were Samuel Sheppard Daniel Allen Rowland Platt Adam Bellamy Daniel Templeman William Dewart Edward Pigget Tho. Brailesford Edward Cheeke Edw. Vnderwood Robert Masters William Warren It is likely that he would have challenged one if not more of the last four but that he had challenged the number of 35. before these four were called and the Law allowed him not to challenge more Then the Indictment being read Mr Dolben as Counsel for the King opened it to the Jury Mr Attorney General then enforced the Charge thus After Sr Tho. Armstrong had fled the Prisoner relieved and aided him with Money and that after he was Indicted and sued to the Exigent besides a Proclamation followed upon his flight which was a sufficient notice to all the King's Subjects Sr Thomas went by the Name of Henry Laurence beyond Sea by that Name the Prisoner held a Correspondence with him and sent him a Letter dated the 21st of August and tells him he had sent him a Bill of Exchange for 165 l. drawn upon his Brother Israel Hayes who was acquainted with Sr Thomas If it were not for these receiving and nourishing of Traytors they would not lurk at Amsterdam as they do The Letter was taken about Sr Thomas and we shall prove it is the Prisoner's Hand-writing and that Sr Thomas received the Money I hope you will take care But like good Men they took all the care they could to stop the Fountain of Blood that to the scandal of the Nation had too long issued from the Old-Bayly by Convicting this Gentleman to stop the Fountain that issues so much supply to these Traytors that lurk abroad Mr Hayes then affirmed that he never knew Sr Thomas in his life Then the Indictment against Sr Thomas was read which was
and the Tryals in that day by Common Juries had this petty difference of the end of July and August happen'd in an ordinary case as the like did in the Case of Otes his Perjury what bawling would have been upon it and had this Excellent person been upon his Tryal before my Lord Russel's Jury or Colonel Sid ney's three Carpenters with the Taylor and their Crew it might have been improved by this Mushroom Lord Jeffryes and the King's Counsel to his Destruction August The other Man says it was the latter end of July My Lord Delamere thereupon said The other Witness saith it was the latter end of July and that may be very well consistent neither of them speaking to a day Mrs Sidney Lane who lived in Sr Cotton's House testified That Sr Robert came to Town in April last and never lay out of Town all those Months of April May and June after he came to Town Charles Reeves Sr Robert's Foot-man testified That Sr Robert was in Town before the Coronation the 23d of April and he saw him every day that time till after July Then Mr Ashburnham Sr William Twisden and Mr Heveningham witnessed that they saw Sr Robert Cotten in Town in June Mr Heveningham in particular that upon the 3d of June he was walking with Robert in the Court of Requests when Mr Neale came and told him the House of Commons had then determined a point about the Election of Thetford Sr Willoughby Aston then proved that upon the 26th of May Mr Offley and his Lady came to his House and he gave a particular account how he spent his time there till the 4th of June when he returned home to his own House which is directly another way from my Lord Delamere's whose House is eleven of those Northern Miles from Sr Willoughby's Mr Gregory and Tho. Kid Servants to Mr Offley witnessed that Mr Offley went from Sr Willoughby Aston's upon the 4th of June directly home to his own House Crew-Hall in Cheshire and did not go from thence that night Mr Booth my Lord Delamer's Brother proved that he saw my Lord in Town the 3d of June in the evening and also the 4th 5th 6th and so on to the 10th of June sometimes twice or thrice a day Mr George Booth another of my Lord's Brothers testified that he saw my Lord in Town the 4th of June by the partioular circumstance that he went with him the next day to the House of Lords to hear my Lord Macclessield's Cause upon Fitton 's Appeale My Lord Lovlace proved that he saw my Lord D. in the House of Lords at the hearing of my Lord Macclesfield's Cause the 5th of June and that my Lord D. stood by the Bar and took notes My Lord D. then said I hope I have now satisfied your Grace and the rest of my Lords that none of us three whom this Fellow has mentioned were at that time at Mere when hé said we were I affirm in the presence of Almighty God that I have not seen Sr Robert Cotton at my House these many years and I believe Mr Offley was never there since I was Master of it and I do protest that to my knowledge I never saw the Face of this Man till now I am sure I never spoke with him nor sent for him to my House If his Story be considered it will easily appear to be very improbable for he neither tells who the Messenger was that was sent for him nor the way that he came into the House and he must needs discern which way he came in for I have but one Door into my House except that by the Stables which is a great way off the House Besides my Lords Is it probable that he should see no Body stiring about the House except the Man without a Hand that he sayes was sent for him I assure your Lordship I have not nor had my Father ever that I know of any Servant or Tenant that was maimed in the manner he speaks of Is it to be imagined that I would take a Man I knew nothing of into so great a confidence as to employ him about a business of this nature I beseech your Lordships to look at him Is this Fellow a likely Fellow to be used in such an affair Does he look as if he were fit to be employed for the raising 10000 Men your Lordship 's likewise see that he is so well thought of that he dare not be trusted out of Newgate but is kept still a Prisoner and as such gives evidence here He Swears to save himself and would fain exchange his Life for mine My Lords The King's Council lay a great weight upon my going down the 27th of May and my frequent riding Post I shall satisfie your Lordships of the Reasons of my Journies the first time I went to take Possession of a Lease of six or seven Thousand pounds value which was renewed to me by the Bishop and I had word that the Bishop was ill and that obliged me to make hast down All this being fully proved by Mr Edmond's and Mr Henry my Lord Delamere proceeded saying I had resolved to go see a sick Child but hod not taken my journey so soon as the 27th of May nor with such privacy but that I had notice there was a Warrant to apprehend me and I was willing to keep out of custody as long as I could Being at my House in Cheshire my Wife sent me an Express that as to the Warrant She hoped it was a mistake but my Eldest Son was very ill and if I intended to see him alive I must make haste up This was the occasion of my quick return Mrs Kelsey then witnessed that my Lord came to his House in Cheshire the 31st of May being Sunday and that his Child was ill and my Lord told her that he heard there was a Warrant to take him up That he stayed Monday the 1st of June and went away on Tuesday morning My Lady Delamere my Lord's Mother testified the Child's being ill in the Country and that while my Lord was there his Lady sent for him Post if he intended to see his eldest Son alive Mr Kelsey proved That my Lor d D. came down upon the Sunday night at eleven of the Clock and stay'd at home all Munday and on Tuesday at three in the Morning he took Horse for London and that Mr Kelsey had Letters from my Lady Delamere and Mrs Vere Booth dated the 4th of June that told him my Lord was come to Town the night before Sr Thomas Millington the Physitian witnessed that upon the 28th of May he was sent for to my Lord Delamere's Son and found him very ill and he continued so two dayes and he told my Lady Delamere that he thought the Child would not escape That he knows punctually this was the time by the Apothecaries Bills which he wrote and finds the date on them My Lord Delamere then said My Lord I hope
Pique against him but against the Cause he was engaged in His Wife did go several times to the Lord H. and by her he believes he sent him thanks He knows no solid effects of his kindness if there were he desires the Lord H. to tell him in what He believes no part of the 6000 l was given to the Lord H. He never heard any thing of the D. of Monmouth's Confession of the Plot till after the Paper was signed by the Duke and sent to him He has heard it as common talk that the Duke had confessed a Plot and that Mr Waller told him so indefinitely he could not tell whether he meant before the signing the Paper or no He saith what the Duke did at that time was all of a piece whether speaking or writing he is sure that it was with the utmost reluctancy that the Duke signed the Paper He remembers no more in the Cabinet Council but the Lord Radnor besides those he has already named but believes there were three or four more He was bailed the 28th of November 1683. and Colonel Sidney he thinks was Executed the 5th of December following The Duke of Monmouth appeared very firm to him and engaged to do his utmost to save Colonel Sidney He saith he came out of the Tower some days before Colonel Sidney was Executed he had an intention to have visited him but his Friends thought it useless and dangerous to them and that he might write any thing he had to say Accordingly he wrote to him that he would come to him if he desired it but Col. Sidney charged him not to come but to write if he thought any inconveniency would come of it The Messenger which brought him the Message before-mentioned was Dr Hall now Bishop of Oxford who applyed to the Dutchess of Portsmouth for his Release but her answer to him afterwards was That she had tryed and could do nothing for they would rather have him rot in Prison than have the 40000 l. Dame Katharine Armstrong being examined deposed that she demanded a Writ of Error of the Cursitor of London for Sr Thomas Armstrong and told him she was ready to pay all due Fees but he told her she must go to the Attorney General and she demanded it publickly in Court of the Lord Keeper North but he said it was not in him to give but the King Mrs Jane Mathews being examined said that her Father was sent to Prison and could have no Council admitted to him nor any Friends speak with him but in the presence of his Keeper he had one Chain on him and was kept close Prisoner she saith she questions not but to prove the Lord Howard perjured for Sr Thomas could have proved by ten Gentlemen and the Servants of the House those base Reflections the Lord Howard made on him to be falshoods She saith her Father demanded his Tryal and also Counsel in the Court but was denied both the Chief Justice Jefferies telling him they had nothing but the Outlawry to go on Withens Holloway and VValcot were other three of the Judges And she thinks he was brought from aboard the Yatch by the Lord Godolphin's Warrant She saith Mr Richardson beat her Sister while she was asking her Father Blessing She saith that her Father was at Sparrow's at Dinner that day that the Lord Howard swore he was not and she saith that when her Father in Court said My Blood be upon you The Lord Chief Justice Jeffryes said let it let it I am Clamour proof Mrs Katherine Armstrong being examined saith That Captain Richardson used her Father ill and made him lie in a Chain on one Leg and would not let her see him alone and was rude to her and struck her in such manner that she had so fore a Breast that she could not put on Bodies in three quarters of a year She saith she went with her Mother to the Cursitor of London to demand a Writ of Error but he refused it She went also on the same Errand to the Lord Keeper North Mr Attorney and the Lord Chief Justice but had none Mr Richard Wynne declared That he was Solicitor to Colonel Sidney That the Colonel excepted against several of the Judy to some as not being Freeholders and others as being in the King's Service and receiving Wages from his Majesty That presently after the Tryal the Lord Chief Justice sent him Prisoner to the King's Bench Mr Wynne said this to Angier the Foreman of that murdering Jury and to Glisby another of the three Carpenters which were upon that Jury and to another of their Brethren near the King's Bench Court whereupon they went to lay hold upon Mr. Wynne at which instant Mr Forth the King's Joyner coming interposed upon which Angier said Mr Forth will you assist this Man he says Colonel Sidney's Jury was a Loggerheaded Jury To which Mr Forth answer'd I have nothing to do with the Jury but Glisby knows that I know he it a Loggerhead Of this They complained to Jeffryes who committed Mr Wynne and Mr Forth to the King's Bench It cost Mr Forth about 50 l. whereof Burton had 24 l. and he being a Protestant Joyner he ' scap'd well out of their Hands as times then went especially with that Trade for saying the Jury were a Loggerheaded Jury that They had not Evidence sufficient to find such a Verdict or found a Verdict contrary to Evidence Mr Serjeant Rotherham being examined declared That he was of Counsel for Colonel Sidney and drew a Plea for him which the Colonel desired to have read and threw it into the Court It was to distinguish the Treasons laid in the Indictment and quoted the three Acts of Treason But the Court told him if the Plea had any slip in it he must have Judgment of Death pass on him immediately After this he pleaded Not Guilty That he demanded a Copy of the Indictment as his due but the Court refused it him That Col. Sidney told him that they proved the Paper they accused him of to be his Hand-writing by a Banker who only had his hand upon a Bill Col. Sidney quoted the Lady Carr's Case in the King 's Benels Trinity Term 1669 Anno 21. Car. 2. wherein it was adjudged that in a Criminal Case 't is not sufficient for a Witness to swear he believes it to be the hand but that he saw the party write it The words in the Case are That it must be proved that she actually writ it and not her hand â—ut credit Note Colonel Sidney demanded the Copy of the Indictment upon the Statute 46 Edw. 3. which allows it to all Men in all Cases That Colonel Sidney ask'd him with the rest of the Council whether all the Book should be read at his Tryal The Council said it ought The Book was by way of Questions and meerly polemical discourse of Government in general as far as Serjeant Rotherham could find after reading in it several hours He