Selected quad for the lemma: enemy_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
enemy_n	king_n	lord_n	treason_n	1,227	5	9.1593	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25874	The arraignment, tryal, and condemnation of Peter Cooke, Gent. for high-treason, in endeavouring to procure forces from France to invade this kingdom, and conspiring to levy war in this realm for assisting and abetting the said invasion, in order to the deposing of His sacred Majesty, King William, and restoring the late King Who upon full evidence was found guilty at the Sessions-House in the Old-Baily, on Wednesday the 13th of May, 1696. And received sentence the same day. With the learned arguments both of the King's and prisoner's council upon the new Act of Parliament for regulating tryals in cases of treason. Perused by the Lord Chief Justice Treby, and the council present at the tryal.	Cooke, Peter, d. 1696.; England and Wales. Court of Quarter Sessions of the Peace (Middlesex)	1696 (1696)	Wing A3757; ESTC R3080	87,497	74

Act of Parliament to take Exceptions to the Indictment before this Jury sworn as we did before the other Jury sworn since all that is quite set aside L. Ch. J. Treby Yes truly I think that may be Mr. Attorn Gen. But these Gentlemen would have done well to have given notice of their Exceptions Sir B. Shewer My Lord I shall not stand upon an Exception which I think I might take to the word Turmas in the Indictment which whether it be Troops of Men or Horses or what it is does not appear but I think we have an Exception to the cheif Overt Act laid in the Indictment and that we presume if my Brief be right will be sufficient to set aside this Indictment The Indictment charges That Mr. Cook did agree with other Traytors to send Mr. Chernock into France to the said late King James and King Jam●s is never mentioned before in all the Indictment that is one Exception that we have that there is no late K. James mentioned in the Indictment before this if my Copy be right if it be otherwise I suppose they will find it it is laid that Mr. Cook did agree to send Cherneck as a Messenger into France eidem nuper Regi Jacobo and no Rex Jacobus mentioned before Then there is another Exception and that 's this They come and say that whereas there was a War with France which is only in the Indictment by way of recital or rehearsal of an History Quod cum per magnum Tempus suit mode fit c. Mr. Cook the Premisses knowing did compass and imag●ne the Kings death and did adhere to the said Kings Enemies such a day Now my Lord I do think that this can never be maintained for that Cum quoddam Bellum c. being an Historical Narrative is not positive enough For adhereing to the Kings Enemies being one of the Treasons laid in the Charge there ought to be a War at the time of the adhesion and of necessity then that ought to be presented by the Jury for tho your Lordships can Judicially take notice of War or Peace yet you cannot take notice of it at such a particular time and the reason is from the Notion that is in my Lord Coke in his 3d Institutes Cap. Treason That adhesions to Rebels is not adhesion to the Kings Enemies for a Rebel is not said to be an Enemy but it must be adhereing to such an Enemy as between whom and the King there was War at that time and consequently it ought to be more positively averred in the Indictment than it here is but as to the Overt Act of Mr. Cooks consulting and agreeing to send Chernock over to the said late King James to give him notice of what was agreed upon between them when King James is not named before that can never be got over with submission Mr. Baker It is a mistake of your Copy Sir Bartholomew Shower Mr. Att. Gen. I have looked into the Record and it is Jacobo Secundo nuper Regi not Dicto Sir B. Shower Then with submission my Lord they cannot try us now for we ought to have a true Copy of the Indictment Mr. Baker Upon Demand But you never demanded it Sir Barth Shower Yes it was demanded Mr. Baker Who demanded it Sir B. Shower Our Sollicitor Burleigh Mr. Baker No he did not I gave it him officiously Mr. Att. Gen. With submission my Lord it is no Objection at all that their Copy is wrong That should have been before the Prisoner had pleaded for the words of the Act are that he shall have it so many days before to enable him to plead and he cannot be put to plead unless he have a Copy of the Indictment so long before and at Rookwood's Tryal it was said by the Court it could not be alleged after Plea pleaded Mr. Burleigh The Copy was given to me publickly in Court Mr. Soll. Gen. Why did not your Sollicitor compare it with the Indictment Mr. Att. Gen. They might have compared it by the Clerk's reading it to them but they will not admit the Prisoner's Sollicitor to see the Original because the Act expresly says they shall not have a Copy of the Witnesses Names Sir B. Shower The Officer is to deliver a true Copy of the Indictment Mr. Att. Gen. No the Party is to demand it by himself or his Agent and then he is to have it and if he be denied he ought to apply himself to the Court who will order the Delivery of it but we stand upon it that they cannot take this Exception now after they have pleaded for the intent of the Copy is to enable him to plead L. C. J. Treby The Copy by the Act of Parliament is to be delivered to the Prisoner his Attorney Agent or Sollicitor if they require the same and here it seems there was no requiring of it but it was voluntarily given and now you have lapsed your time of making the Exception of wanting a Copy by having pleaded to the Indictment whereby you have in effect admitted and declared either that you had a true Copy of it or that you did not think fit to require one for the use of the Copy is to better enable the Prisoner to plead But when you did plead you took upon your self to be well able to plead without the help of a Copy which you might have had upon the asking for Sir B. Shower Then my Lord there is another thing in the Indictment that in this Overt-Act there is a new Time and a new Place and a new Verb and a new Fact alleged and no Nominative Case it is alleged that Peter Cook at first with others did so and so and then the first of July to bring the Treasons aforesaid to effect there alibi c. which is very loose for I know not whence the Venue must come did traiterously with Chernock Friend c. consult to procure Diversas Turmas Legiones c. to join with them in England and then it comes ulterius such a Day Year and Place did traiterously agree so and so and not say who now this is neither by express words nor Rule of Grammar to be referred to the Prisoner at the Bar it does not say Ipse Idem Petrus Cook now my Lord that the King's Counsel thought it necessary in every OvertAct is plain because those words are put in every other Clause of the Indictment in those Clauses that goe before and those Clauses that come after then if they will take it that this Clause must refer to the next Antecedent that will not do for the next precedent Nominative Case is either Friend or Chernock So that this is without a Nominative Case and the Presidents in my Lord Coke's Entries 361 and all the other Books have the Nominative Case repeated where there is a new Time and a new Place and a new Fact alleged now it might be true that the Prisoner at the

Bar might be present and this same Treason might be discoursed of and agitated and there might be a Consult about this Business and yet it is not necessarily implied that he must consent and agree to send Chernock into France upon which the great stress of the Indictment lies therefore we say these words having no Nominative Case the Indictment cannot hold Mr. Att. Gen. My Lord as to this Objection it will receive a very plain Answer Our Indictment begins and sets forth that Peter Cook the Prisoner at the Bar did imagine and compass the King's Death and did adhere to the King's Enemies and these are the Treasons and then it sets forth the Overt Act that in Execution of the traiterous Compassings Imaginations and Adhesions aforesaid Ipse Idem Petrus Cook together with Sir William Parkins Mr. Chernock Sir John Friend and others did propose and consult to procure from the French King Forces to invade this Land ulterius he and they did agree to send Chernock to the late King James Mr. J. Rookeby There 's the first naming of James the Second late King of England and there is no eidem Jacobo I promise you L. C. J. Treby Well that Mistake is over Pray go on Mr. Attorney General Mr. Att. Gen. My Lord as to this Objection of Sir Barth Shower he would have Ipse Idem Petrus repeated over again and he says that we lay a distinct Over-Act with a different Time and Place Now that is a mistake too it is not a different Time and Place but the same Time and Place and it mentions that cum R. Chernock J. Friend c. cum aliis Proditoribus conveniebat consultabat c. Which he says may refer to Sir J. Friend or Charnock but if you look into the Frame of the Sentence that can never be Mr. J. Rookeby Petrus Cook is the Nominative Case that governs all the Verbs Mr. Att. Gen. And there is no other Nom. Case in all the Indictments but Petrus Cook except it be in a Parenthesis and that saves the Rule of Grammar if there were any thing in it that it must refer to the last antecedent Sir B. Shower When it comes to the Clause that he did procure Horse and Arms there the Nominative Case is repeated L. C. J. Treby It would not have made it worse if they had made it so here but the Question is whether it be necessary Sir B. Shower Indictments ought to be precisely certain but this we say is not so Mr. Att. Gen. But here is as much certainty as to the Person as can be that he did consult with such and such about such things and further the same Day did agree with the same Traytors to do so and so Mr. J. Powell Indictments it is true ought to be plain and clear but I do not see but here is as much certainty as can be that he did such a Day consult and further the same Day did agree with the same Persons Sir B. Shower VVho did agree my Lord Mr. J. Powell He that did consult with them before and that is Peter Cook Mr. Att. Gen. You 'd have had us to have put it to every Verb I believe Sir B. Shower In Indictments no Presumption ought to be used but the Facts ought to be directly and positively alleged Mr. J. Powell It s true there should be no Presumption and there is none here for certainly this is a plain Assertion of Fact L. C. J. Treby Here are two things that are set forth First That Peter Cook did meet with Sir John Friend Sir William Parkyns and others and then and there did consult with them and consent to procure an Invasion and joyn an Insurrection thereto And Secondly Further with the said Traytors did agree to send Chernock into France Now what is the Nominative Case to this Agreement Is it Sir John Friend and Sir William Parkyns That 's impossible for they could not be said properly to meet and consult with themselves every one of them with his own self and the rest And then the Number if it had referr'd to them should have been Plural but here it is Singular agreavit and the sense is no more than this That then and there Mr. Cook did meet with such Persons and did consult with them about such and such Matters and further did agree with them to do thus Sir B. Shower The meaning is not to be forced and strained by Inference or Presumption but it ought to be express and plain L. C. J. Treby Nay you cannot express it better you may make a Tautology of it if you will Sir B. Shower The Paragraph is long my Lord and therefore requires the more care to have those Repetitions that are necessary L. C. J. Treby Your Objection to this Paragraph is that it is too long but repeating the same Nominative Case to every Verb would make it much longer Sir B. Shower It cannot be understood to mean Peter Cook without Presumption which ought not to be in an Indictment Mr. Att. Gen. And as to Sir Bar. Shower's first Objection his Copy is right too and he mistook the place Sir B. Shower You shou'd have given me that for an Answer Mr. Att. Gen. Nay you should have taken more care and not have made the Objection L. C. J. Treby Truly I think it is hardly possible to have made this better if it had been otherwise than it is Mr. Serj. Darnel My Lord we think we have a good Fact of it which we rely upon and therefore do not so much insist upon these Exceptions tho in duty to our Client we mention that which we think is necessary and we submit to your Lordship Cl. of Arr. Set Peter Cook to the Bar. Which was done You the Prisoner at the Bar these good Men which you shall hear called and personally appear are to pass between our Sovereign Lord the King and you upon Tryal of your Life and Death if therefore you wou'd challenge them or any of them your time is to speak unto them as they come to the Book to be sworn and before they be sworn Cryer Call Sir John Sweetapple Sir John Swetapple Here. Cook My Lord Chief Justice if your Lordship please I am advised L. C. J. Treby Pray Sir speak out that we may hear what you say and let the Cryer make proclamation for silence Which was done Cook My Lord before the Jury is called I am advised that if any of the Jury have said already that I am guilty or they will find me guilty or I shall suffer or be hanged or the like they are not fit or proper Men to be of the Jury L. C. J. Treby You say right Sir it is a good cause of Challenge Mr. J. Rokeby That will be a sufficient cause if when they come to the Book you object that and be ready to prove it Cook Which is Sir John Sweetapple He was shewn to him Cl. of Arr.

Evidence The Names of the Twelve sworn are as follow Henry Sherbrook John Cullum Thomas Shaw Richard Young John Cooper Jonathan Micklethwait John Wolfe Thomas Collins John Watson Benjamin Hooper Daniel Wray and John Pettit Cl. of Arr. Cryer Make Proclamation Cryer O Yez If any one can inform my Lord the King's Justices the King's Serjeant the King's Attorney-General or this Inquest now to be taken of the High Treason whereof Peter Cook the Prisoner at the Bar stands Indicted let them come forth and they shall be heard for the now Prisoner stands at the Bar upon his Deliverance and all others that are bound by Recognizance to give Evidence against the Prisoner at the Bar let them come forth and give their Evidence or they forfeit their Recognizance L. C. J. Treby You must make room for those Twelve Gentlemen that are sworn that they may be at ease and for those that are not sworn their Attendance may be spared Cl. of Arr. Peter Cook hold up thy Hand Which he did Gentlemen you that are sworn look upon the Prisoner and hearken to his Cause He stands Indicted in London by the Name of Peter Cook late of London Gentleman For that whereas an Open and Notoriously Publick and most Sharp and Cruel War for a great while hath been and yet is by Land and by Sea Carried on and Prosecuted by Lewis the French King against the Most Serene Most Illustrious and Most Excellent Prince our Sovereign Lord William the Third by the Grace of God of England Scotland France and Ireland King Defender of the Faith c. All which time the said Lewis the French King and his Subjects were and yet are Foes and Enemies of our said Lord the King that now is William the Third and his Subjects He the said Peter Cook a Subject of the said Lord the King that now is of this his Kingdom of England well knowing the Premises not having the Fear of God in his Heart nor weighing the Duty of his Allegiance but being moved and seduced by the Instigation of the Devil as a false Traytor against the said Most Serene Most Mild and Most Excellent Prince our Sovereign Lord William the Third now King of England his Supreme True Rightful Lawful and Undoubted Lord the Cordial Love and True and Due Obedience Fidelity and Allegiance which every Subject of the said Lord the King that now is towards him our said Lord the King should bear and of Right is bound to bear withdrawing and utterly to Extinguish Intending and Contriving and with all his Strength Purposing and Designing the Government of this Kingdom of England under Him our said Lord the King that now is of Right Duly Happily and very Well Establish'd altogether to Subvert Change and Alter and His Faithful Subjects and the Freemen of this Kingdom of England into Intolerable and Miserable Servitude to the aforesaid French King to Subdue and Inthral the First Day of July in the Seventh Year of the Reign of our said Lord the King that now is and divers Days and Times as well before as after at London in the Parish of St. Peter Cornhil in the Ward of Limestreet Falsly Maliciously Devilishly and Trayterously did Compass Imagine and Contrive Purpose and Intend our said Sovereign Lord the King that now is then his Supreme True Rightful and Lawful Lord of and from the Regal State Title Honour Power Crown Empire and Government of this Kingdom of England to Depose Cast down and Utterly Deprive and the same our Lord the King to Death and Final Destruction to bring and the aforesaid Lewis the French King by Armies Soldiers Legions and his Subjects this Kingdom of England to Invade Fight with Conquer and Subdue to Move Incite Procure and Assist and a Miserable Slaughter among the Faithful Subjects of our said Lord King William throughout this whole Kingdom of England to Make and Cause And further That the said Peter Cook during the War aforesaid to wit the aforesaid First Day of July in the Seventh Year abovesaid and divers other Days and Times before and after at London aforesaid in the Parish and Ward aforesaid to the said Foes and Enemies of the same our Lord the King did Adhere and was Assisting And his aforesaid most Wicked and Devilish Treasons and Trayterous Compassings Contrivances Intentions and Purposes aforesaid to Fulfil Perfect and bring to Effect and in Prosecution Performance and Execution of that Trayterous Adhering He the said Peter Cook as such a False Traytor during the War aforesaid to wit the same First Day of July in the Year abovesaid at London aforesaid in the Parish and Ward aforesaid and divers other Days and Times as well before as after there and elsewhere in London aforesaid Falsly Maliciously Advisedly Secretly and Trayterously and by Force and Arms with one Robert Chernock Sir John Friend and Sir William Parkyns Knights which said Robert Chernock Sir John Friend and Sir William Parkyns were lately severally Duly Convicted and Attainted of High Treason in Contriving and Conspiring the Death of our said Lord the King that now is and with divers other False Traytors to the Jurors unknown did Meet Propose Treat Consult Consent and Agree to Procure from the aforesaid Lewis the French King of his Subjects Forces and Soldiers then and yet Foes and Enemies of our said Sovereign Lord William now King of England c. great Numbers of Soldiers and Armed Men this Kingdom of England to Invade and Fight with and to Levy Procure and Prepare great Numbers of Armed Men and Troops and Legions against our said Lord the King that now is to Rise up and be Formed and with those Foes and Enemies at and upon such their Invasion and Entry within this Kingdom of England to Join and Unite Rebellion and War against our said Lord the King that now is within this Kingdom of England to Make Levy and Carry on the same our Lord the King so as aforesaid to Depose and Him to Kill and Murther And further with the said False Traytors the same First Day of July in the Year abovesaid at London aforesaid in the Parish and Ward aforesaid Trayterously did Consult Consent and Agree to send the aforesaid Robert Chernock as a Messenger from him the said Peter Cock and the same other Traytors as far as and into the Kingdom of France in Parts beyond the Seas unto James the Second late King of England to Propose to him and to Request him to obtain from the aforesaid French King the aforesaid Soldiers and Armed Men for the Invasion aforesaid to be made and Intelligence and Notice of such their Trayterous Intentions and Adherings to the said late King James the Second and the said other Foes and Enemies and their Adherents to give and shew and them to inform of other Things Particulars and Circumstances thereunto Referring for the Assistance Animating Comforting and Aid of the said Foes and Enemies of the said Lord the King that now is

be for nothing but for the sake of Truth It has been further said on the behalf of Mr. Cook That he Abhorred the French and any Invasion upon his Country and the like It is a matter that is easily said and it has been said by others that have been in the same Place where he now stands That they hated all Plots and they might punish them if ever they caught them But these are only Sayings and nothing else If there can be any Constructions made of the Evidence given by these two Witnesses that does not directly prove the Indictment then the Prisoner ought to be Acquitted But if there can be no other Construction made but only That there was a plain Design to send Chernock into France to King James to perswade him to prevail with the French King to come and Invade us with a Foreign Force And if our Witnesses are Legal Witnesses as I doubt not my Lords the Judges will tell you they are if there be no Exception to the Credit of Goodmen but only that he was in such a Design of Poysoning the two Dukes which is really no Objection of Discredit to his Testimony then with Submission I think there is no room left for you Gentlemen of the Jury to doubt but that the Prisoner is as Guilty of this Crime laid to his charge as any others that have been Try'd and Condemn'd for the same And so Gentlemen I leave it to you L. C. J. Treby Mr. Conyers and Mr. Cowper will you say any thing to this matter Mr. Conyers and Mr. Cowper No my Lord we submit it entirely to your Lordships Direction we have done on all sides we think L. C. J. Treby Gentlemen of the Jury the Prisoner at the Bar Mr. Cook stands indicted here for High Treason there are laid in the Indictment two sorts of Treason the one is Compassing and Imagining the Death of the King the other is adhering to the King's Enemies The Evidence to prove these Treasons seems to be joynt for as to that of Compassing and Imagining the King's Death as well as to the other the Overt Acts are meeting and consulting about the Treason and then agreeing and resolving to invite and procure an Invasion from France and to meet that Invasion with an Insurrection here And the Evidence is apply'd entirely to prove these Acts. Gentlemen that these are proper Overt Acts of Compassing the King's Death I need not inform you the Law is very well known and the Prisoner's own Councel do acknowledge that these are sufficient Overt Acts of Compassing and Imagining the King's Death So that all which they Defend him by is the Improbability of the Testimony given against him Now Gentlemen you are to consider and weigh well the Evidence that has been given By Law it is true as they observe there must be Two Witnesses Here is no defect of Number that 's acknowledg'd too here are two Witnesses but the Question is whether here be two Witnesses that deserve Credit and upon whose Testimony you can find that the Prisoner is Guilty The Witnesses Gentlemen are Mr. Porter and Mr. Goodman First For the matter of their Testimony it is positive from them both that you 'll do well to observe Mr. Porter tells you That 〈◊〉 May last which is now just a Twelve-month there was a meeting of Eight Persons that is my Lord of Ailesbury my Lord Montgomery Sir John Fenwick Sir William Parkyns Sir John Friend Mr. Chernock Mr. Cook the Prisoner at the Bar and the Witness himself Mr. Porter and this was at the Kings-head Tavern in Leaden-hall-street and there these Eight dined and this was in order to consult about an Invasion together with an Insurrection intended to be made for the Restoring of the late King After Dinner comes in Mr. Goodman he says and then they pursued this Consultation and came to a Resolution to send Mr. Chernock into France and the Message was agreed upon which he should carry and he was to go to the late King and sollicite him to obtain 10000 Soldiers from the French King whereof 8000 should be Foot 1000 Horse and 1000 Dragoons These were to make up the 10000 men to invade this Kingdom And they resolved also when this Force should land they should meet and assist this Invasion with a joynt Force that should consist of 2000 Horse And to Acquaint and Assure him of this was the Message But he says That Mr. Chernock was very cautious in it and would not presently go upon this Errand but he would have further Assurance that they were in earnest and would make good what they did send him to propose therefore he would have a second meeting a second meeting was had that was at Mrs. Mountjoy's Tavern and there they did renew the same Resolution and there were present my Lord of Ailesbury Sir William Parkyns Sir John Fenwick Sir John Friend Mr. Chernock the Prisoner at the Bar and himself he does not know or remember whether my Lord Montgomery or Mr. Goodman was there He says Mr. Chernock did accordingly go into France and he did return and bring back King James's Thanks to them but their Desire could not be comply'd with and he had his Share of the Complements Now comes Mr. Goodman he says That about the same time viz. Mid-May Mr. Porter acquainted him there would be a meeting of some of K. James ●s Friends at this Tavern in Leaden-hall street He says That he did tell Mr. Porter he doubted he should not be there at Dinner but he would come as soon as he could after Dinner and according to appointment he did come after Dinner and there was this Consultation and Resolution that Mr. Porter speaks of and says That Mr. Chernock afterwards told him he had been in France with the late King and brought back the same Answer that Mr. Porter speaks of and he had the Honour of Thanks from the late King too Gentlemen I must observe one thing to you which does go very much towards the confirming what these Witnesses say and that is the Agreement in their Testimonies tho they were examin'd Apart at the Desire of the Prisoner You will find they agree in these several Circumstances in the Time that it was this time twelve-months in the Place that it was at this Tavern in the Number of Persons that were there which was Eight before Mr. Goodman came in in the number of Horse Foot and Dragoons that were to be brought from France and in those Horse that were to meet them here and besides in those words of Discourse upon the Consultation and the Resolution And there is one Circumstance more in which they do agree and which is very particular That when they came to deliver their Consent to this Message that Mr. Chernock was to carry the rest sate and Mr. Cook the Prisoner did kneel upon the Chair and lean'd upon the Table And this both of them do agree in

in the War aforesaid And to Stir up and Procure those Foes and Enemies the readilier and more boldly this Kingdom of England to Invade the Treasons and Trayterous Contrivances Compassings Imaginings and Purposes of the said Peter Cook aforesaid to Perfect and Fulfil also the same First day of July in the Seventh Year abovesaid at London aforesaid in the Parish and Ward aforesaid He the said Peter Cook divers Horses and very many Arms Guns Muskets Pistols Rapiers and Swords and other Weapons Ammunition and Warlike Matters and Military Instruments Falsly Maliciously Secretly and Trayterously did Obtain Buy Gather together and Procure and to be Bought Gathered together Obtained and Procured did Cause and in his Custody had and detained to that Intent To use the same in the said Invasion War and Rebellion against our said Lord the King that now is Him our said Lord the King of and from the Regal State Crown and Government of this Kingdom of England to Depose Cast down and Deprive and Him to Kill and Murther and the Designs Intentions and all the Purposes of him the said Peter Cook aforesaid to Fulfil Perfect and fully to bring to Effect against the Duty of his Allegiance and against the Peace of our said Sovereign Lord that now is his Crown and Dignity as also against the Form of the Statute in such Case made and provided Upon this Indictment he has been Arraigned and thereunto has pleaded Not Guilty and for his Tryal hath put himself upon God and his Country which Country you are your Charge is to inquire whether he be guilty of the High-Treason whereof he stands Indicted or not guilty if you find him guilty you are to inquire what Goods or Chattels Lands or Tenements he had at the time of the High-Treason committed or at any time since if you find him not guilty you are to inquire whether he fled for it if you find that he fled for it you are to inquire of his Goods and Chattels as if you had sound him Guilty if you find him not Guilty nor that he did fly for it you are to say so and no more and hear your Evidence Mr. Mompesson May it please your Lordship and you Gentlemen that are sworn this is an Indictment for High Treason against Peter Cook the Prisoner at the Bar and the Indictment sets forth That whereas there has been an open and cruel War for a long time and still is between his Majesty King William and the French King the Prisoner at the Bar not weighing the Duty of his Allegiance the First of July in the Seventh year of the King's Reign Did Compass and Intend to Depose and Deprive the King of the Title Honour and Dignity of the Imperial Crown of this Realm and likewise to put the King to Death and did adhere to the King's Enemies and to fulfil these Treasons he did Consult with Chernock and several other Traytors who were mentioned there and some of whom have been found Guilty of Treason and executed for it to send over to the late King James to perswade the French King to send over Soldiers and Arms to invade this Kingdom and to raise an Insurrection and Rebellion in it and to Deprive and put the King to Death and to compleat these Treasons it further sets forth That the Prisoner at the Bar did provide several Arms and Horses and this is laid to be against the Duty of his Allegiance against the King's Peace Crown and Dignity and against the Form of the Statute in that Case made and provided to this he had pleaded Not Guilty and for Tryal put himself upon the Country and Gentlemen if we prove these Facts laid in the indictment it s your Duty to find him Guilty Mr. Att. Gen. May it please your Lordship and you Gentlemen of the Jury the Prisoner at the Bar stands Indicted for High Treason Cook My Lord Chief-Justice if your Lordship pleases before the Witnesses are Examined against me I intreat you that they may not be both in Court together that one may not hear what the other swears tho' I suppose it is the same thing for they have been together both now and the last day L. C. J. Treby Mr. Cook I must tell you it is not necessary to be granted for asking for we are not to discourage or cast any Suspicion upon the Witnesses when there is nothing made out against them but it is a Favour that the Court may grant and does grant sometimes and now does it to you tho' it be not of necessity they shall be examined apart but at present this is not the time of Examination for the King's Counsel are now to open the Evidence before they examine the Witnesses but when the time comes for the Witnesses to be called and examined the Court will in favour to you take care that your Request be complied with Mr. Att. Gen. May it please your Lordship the Prisoner stands Indicted for High Treason in Compassing and Imagining the Death and Destruction of his Majesty and likewise in adhering to his Majesty's Enemies these are the Treasons specified in the Indictment the Overt Acts that are laid to prove these Treasons are That he with several other Traitors named in the Indictment did Meet and Consult and agree to send over Chernock into France to invite the French King to make an Invasion upon the Kingdom and did provide Arms for that purpose Gentlemen the nature of the Evidence that you will have produced to prove the Prisoner Guilty of these Treasons lies thus It will appear to you that there has been for some time a Conspiracy carried on by several Traytors and Wicked Persons to subvert the established Government of this Kingdom and destroy the Constitution of England by a Foreign Invasion of the French You will hear that this Conspiracy was laid wide and consisted of several parts one part was that of Assassinating his Majesty's Royal Person and that was to be done first as a Preparation and Encouragement to the French to invade the Kingdom the other part was the inviting the French King to invade us and the Prisoner at the Bar is accused of being concerned in that part that relates to the Invasion of this Kingdom by a French Power and tho' it may be the other part that of Assassinating the King be the Blackest part of the Conspiracy yet if the Prisoner at the Bar has been ingaged in the inviting a Foreign Power to invade the Kingdom my Lords the Judges will tell you in Point of Law that is as much an Overt Act of the Compassing the Destruction of the King and People of England and the Subversion of our ancient good Constitution as if he had been concerned immediately in the other part the Assassination But now Gentlemen that the Prisoner was ingaged in Inviting the French to Invade us you will hear proved by several Witnesses that there having been a Design last Year just before his Majesty

except Sir John Friend which makes it probable this being a House that Sir John Friend frequented and none of the others that He bespoke this place and brought the rest thither And if it were so that makes it more probable that there was such a Treason there to be hatch'd as is evidenced by the King's Witnesses for you may remember and it appears by the Record in this Court that Sir John Friend was indicted and attainted not for the Assassination but for the Treason for which the Prisoner is now a trying an Invasion that was to be supported with an Insurrection Now if Sir John Friend was chiefly acquainted with this House and brought this Company together it is very probable it was about this business which Sir J. Friend was so concerned in And that he is Attainted for it appears upon the Record before us which should be read but that the Prisoners Counsel admit it and are so far satisfied in it that they won't Arraign the Verdict nay they did acknowledge that there was a Plot and there was no doubt of it there was such a Plot. Now then Gentlemen here it is certainly proved by these two Witnesses and not gainsaid by the Prisoners own Witnesses that there was such a Meeting and that the Prisoner was there and they both have positively Sworn that this Treason was committed there You have heard what has been objected to their Credit they have delivered their Testimony upon their Oaths and so Gentlemen are you upon your Oaths If you are satisfied and can take it upon your Consciences that these two Witnesses are or any one of them is forsworn if such distinction can possibly be made in this case then you are to acquit the Prisoner but if you are satisfied and think they have sworn true you are to find him Guilty Mr. J. Rokeby Nay if one be forsworn both are for the Evidence is entirely in all parts the same and if Mr. Goodman be perjured Mr. Porter is so too Sir B. Shower Forsworn and Perjured are hard words we only say mistaken Mr. J. Rokeby Well that Objection goes to one as well as t'other L. C. J. Treby It must be so since they speak of the same joint matter viz. their being together in Company If Mr. Porter says true when he swears that Mr. Goodman was there with him and the rest Mr. Goodman must say true when he swears that he was there with Mr. Porter and the rest There was one thing that I forgot Sir B. Shower observed that it might be an Invention of Captain Porter because he fixeth it in point of time to the Month of May that he does not say it was in April for that then it would be within the Pardon which extends to April 29. last year nor would he lay it in June for then he was in Newgate and others of them were disperst by reason of a Riot committed in Drury-lane and so there was no Month left but May And this Sir B. Shower alledges was a piece of Skill and Contrivance But really this is a piece of Ingenuity in himself For besides that the King's Witnesses affirm positively that it was in May and remember it by a certain token viz. That it was within a very few days after the King went beyond Sea one or two of the Prisoner's Witnesses Crawford I am sure did say that this Meeting was this time twelve-month and you know we are now near mid May. Mr. Serjeant Darnall If you believe our Drawers for part you must believe them for all Mr. Att. Gen. No not so My Lord speaks only where they concur with our Evidence It were strange to expect we should disbelieve or doubt what the Witnesses on both sides affirm to be true But I do not think it would be to the Advantage of the Prisoner if what his Counsel proposeth were agreed to viz. that the Drawers and their Master too should be believed for All they say provided equally that the King's Witnesses should in like manner be believ'd for what they say For the main thing controverted is whether Mr. Goodman were at this Meeting These Witnesses for the Prisoner say they did not see him there at least they do not remember it Mr. Porter and Mr. Goodman himself say he was there Now these things agreed and admitted would make a very consistent clear Evidence that Mr. Goodman was there though the Master and Drawers did not observe or do not remember his being there Then an Officer was sworn to keep the Jury who withdrew to consider of their Verdict and about three quarters of an Hour after they returned into Court Cl. of Arr. Gentlemen answer to your Names Henry Sherbrook Mr. Sherbrook Here And so of the rest c. Cl. of Arr. Are you all agreed of your Verdict Jury Yes Cl. of Arr. Who shall say for you Jury Our Foreman Cl. of Arr. Set Peter Cook to the Bar which was done Peter Cook hold up thy Hand which he did Look upon the Prisoner how say you is he guilty of the High Treason whereof he stands Indicted or not guilty Foreman Guilty Cl. of Arr. What Goods or Chattels Lands or Tenements had he at the time of the Treason committed or at any time since Foreman None to our Knowledge Cl. of Arr. Then hearken to your Verdict as the Court has recorded it You say that Peter Cook is guilty of the High Treason whereof he stands indicted but that he had no Goods or Chattels Lands or Tenements at the time of the High Treason committed or at any time since to your Knowledge and so you say all Jury Yes Cl. of Arr. Gentlemen the Court dismisses you and thanks you for your Service Then the Court adjourned till 5 a-Clock in the Evening Post Meridiem About six a-Clock the Court being by Proclamation Resum'd the Prisoner convicted was brought to the Bar in order to Judgment Cl. of Arr. Peter Cook hold up thy Hand which he did thou stand'st convicted of High Treason for compassing and imagining the Death of his Majesty King William the Third and for adhering to the King's Enemies what canst thou say for thy self why the Court should not give thee Judgment to dye according to the Law Cook My Lord Mayor my Eyes are very bad therefore I desire your Lordship would be pleased to take this Paper and that it may be read Cl. of Arr. Have you any thing to say in Arrest of Judgment Cook I desire my Paper may be read It was handed up to the Court and then delivered down to Mr. Att. General and the King's Counsel but not openly read Mr. Recorder Mr. Cook the Court have read your Paper you sent up and have communicated it to the King's Counsel if you have any thing to move in Arrest of Judgment this is your time and we will hear you but as for any Representation of your Case to any others that must be considered of afterwards you are now called to