A TRUE ACCOUNT OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE House of LORDS From Jan. 7. 1691. to Feb. 17. following BETWEEN The Duke and Dutchess of Norfolk Upon the Duke's BILL ENTITULED An Act to Dissolve the Marriage c. OCCASIONED By Two Libellous PAMPHLETS lately Published and Dispersed under the same Pretence and Title LONDON Printed in the Year MDCXCII THE PREFACE THere have been lately printed and made publick Two scandalous Pamphlets the one under the Title of The Proceedings before the House of Lords between the Duke and Dutchess of Norfolk The other is called The farther Depositions and Proceeddings in the House of Lords in the Affair of the Duke and Dutchess of Norfolk with the Bill of Divorce Now these two Papers are so far from a faithful Narrative of the said Proceedings that what with confounding the Order of the Transaction and disguising the Truth of Things by industrious Omissions gross Imperfections and wilfal Mistakes This pretended Account has made it absolutely necessary even for the sake of common Justice to set the World right in the Story To which end the entire Series of this Affair is here set forth from Point to Point just as it passed before their Lordships and stands upon their Journal with such Notes upon the Evidence on both sides as the Nature of the Case requires and as the Reason of it will fairly bear The Reader will observe here upon this Relation that the two Principal Witnesses produced against the Dutchess of Norfolk are Rowland Owen and Margaret Ellwood for they swear positively to the stress of the Question whereas all the rest is but Circumstantial and made use of only for Aggravation Prejudice and Clamour So that upon invalidating their Testimony the main Cause falls effectually to the Ground saving only the unavoidable Misfortune of many an Innocent Person that suffers under the Impossibility of proving a Negative there being no Fence against uncharitable Presumptions Now taking this for granted as it is not to be denied the Reader is only desired to lay seriously to Heart the Impossibility of the Fact that is sworn against the Dutchess in some Cases and the utter impossibility of it to be true in others The Tampering and Practice that has been used the Inconsistency of the Witnesses with themselves their Character and Credit c. one of them Ann Burton being trapt in a false Oath out of her own Mouth upon the very place of Examination The Reader will also take notice that of Twenty Six Witnesses produced in Favour of the Duke one half of them are Principals and the other only Seconds Peter Scriber Andrew Anderson Robert Hemming John Reynolds and Margaret Foster are five of the former Number but speaking little or nothing to the Merits of the Question it was not thought worth the while to offer Exceptions to their Testimony though to the other Eight that is to say Owen Ellwood Hudson Burton Varelst Tho. Foster Lloyd and Wadsworth there were several Witnesses on the behalf of the Dutchess to invalidate their Credit viz. Two to the First Six to the Second Two to the Third Four to the Fourth One to the Fifth Two to the Sixth Two to the Seventh and Six to the Last It is very remarkable also after all these Exceptions to every one of the Duke 's principal Witnesses that the Testimony of the Dutchess's Witnesses passed current without any contradiction saving only that Henry Daggley and John Hoskins were examined against the Credit of John Hall in the Case of Jane Wadsworth leaving four Witnesses more in the same Case untouch'd and Edith Sawbridge against the Testimony of Mrs. Judith Stourton which Depositions the Reader will find to be of little or no moment as to the matter in hand This puts it past Dispute that they had nothing more to say against the Witnesses for the Dutchess but stopt at these three for want of farther Pretence The Result in short is this that all the material Witnesses to the Charge are Impeached and the Evidence on the other side stands untainted To say nothing of the unanswerable Reasons that prevailed with the Lords finally to reject the Bill especially considering the Solemnity of the Proceedings For the Cause was kept on from the 7th of January to the 17th of February following All the Lords in and about the Town being summon'd by an Order of the House bearing Date Die Veneris Feb. 12. 1691. to attend at Twelve of the Clock on the Tuesday following And the Officers that summoned them to give an Account of what Lords they summoned pursuant to which Order their Lordships met according to the Appointment and after some previous Debates Adjourned till the next Day when the Depositions on both sides were read at the Table by the Clerk as will be seen more at large upon the following Journal And after a long and solemn Debate The Question being put Whether the Bill entituled An Act to Dissolve the Marriage of Henry Duke of Norfolk Earl Marshal of England with the Lady Mary Mordant and to enable the said Duke to Marry again shall be read a second time It was Resolved in the Negative A True ACCOUNT of the Proceedings before the House of Lords from January the 7th 1691 to the 17th of February following between the Duke and Dutchess of Norfolk upon the Duke's Bill Entituled An Act to Dissolve the Marriage c. The 7th of January the said Bill was lodg'd in the House of Lords The 8th of January THE Dutchess of Norfolk having received Intimation that the Duke of Norfolk was this Day offering a Bill to the House of Lords for Dissolving the Marriage between them and that the same was under Debate before their Lordships She was advised to present the following Petition To the Right Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled The Humble Petition of Mary Dutchess of Norfolk Sheweth THat your Petitioner being informed that the Duke of Norfolk is at this time offering a Bill to your Lordships for Dissolving the Marriage between him and your Petitioner Your Petitioner Humbly prays she may be heard by Your Lordships before such Bill be received And Your Petitioner will ever pray c. M. Norfolk Upon which Petition their Lordships were pleased to make the following Order viz. Die Veneris 8 Januarii 1691. A Bill having been offered to this House on the behalf of the Duke of Norfolk to dissolve the Marriage between the said Duke and his Dutchess It was ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled that Her Grace shall have notice thereof and may be heard by her Counsel at the Bar of this House on Tuesday next at 12 of the Clock what she hath to object against the receiving the said Bill at which time the said Duke may also be heard by his Counsel for the said Bill if he shall think fit Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parlimentor ' Die Martis 12 Januarii 1691. AFter hearing Counsel this day at
the Bar what they could object for her Grace the Dutchess of Norfolk against the receiving of a Bill offered by his Grace the Duke of Norfolk to dissolve the Marriage between him and his Dutchess As also the Counsel of his Grace the Duke of Norfolk for receiving the said Bill And after Consideration of what was offered by Counsel on either side and a long Debate thereupon This Question was put Whether the Duke of Norfolk ' s Bill should be received It was Resolved in the Affirmative Which Bill is as followeth An Act to Dissolve the Marriage of Henry Duke of Norfolk Earl Marshal of England with the Lady Mary Mordant and to enable the said Duke to Marry again FOrasmuch as Henry Duke of Norfolk and Earl Marshal of England having been Married to the Lady Mary Mordant hath made full proof that his said Wife is guilty of and hath committed Adultery on her part And forasmuch as the said Henry Duke of Norfolk hath no Issue nor can have any probable expectation of Posterity to succeed him in his Honours Dignities and Estate unless the said Marriage be declared void by Authority of Parliament and the said Duke be enabled to Marry any other Woman The King and Queens Most Excellent Majesties upon the Humble Petition of the said Henry Duke of Norfolk having taken the Premises into their Royal Consideration for divers weighty Reasons are pleased that it be Enacted And be it Enacted by the King and Queens Most Excellent Majesties and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons in this present Parliament assembled and by the Authority of the same That the said Marriage between the said Henry Duke of Norfolk and the said Lady Mary his Wife shall from henceforth be null and void and is by Authority of this present Parliament Declared Adjudged and Enacted to be null and void to all Intents Constructions and Purposes whatsoever And that it shall and may be lawful to and for the said Henry Duke of Norfolk at any time or times hereafter to Contract Matrimony and to Marry as well in the Life-time of the said Lady Mary as if she were naturally dead with any other Woman or Women with whom he might lawfully marry in case the said Lady Mary was not living And that such Matrimony when had and celebrated shall be a good just and lawful Marriage and so shall be adjudged deemed and taken to all Intents Constructions and Purposes And that all and every Children and Child born in such Matrimony shall be deemed adjudged and taken to be born in lawful Wedlock and to be Legitimate and Inheritable and shall inherit the said Dukedome of Norfolk Office of Earl Marshal of England and all other Earldoms Dignities Baronies Honours and Titles of Honour Lands Tenements and other Hereditaments from and by their Fathers Mothers and other Ancestors in like manner and form as any other Child or Children born in lawful Matrimony shall or may inherit or be inheritable according to the Course of Inheritances used in this Realm And to have and enjoy all Priviledges Preheminencies Benefits Advantages Claims and Demands as any other Child or Children born in lawful Wedlock may have or claim by the Laws or Customs of this Kingdom And be it farther Enacted That the said Henry Duke of Norfolk shall be Intituled to be Tenant by Courtesy of the Lands and Inheritance of such Wife whom he shall hereafter marry And such Wife as he shall so marry shall be Intitled to a Dower of the Lands and Tenements of the said Henry Duke of Norfolk and of such Estate whereof she shall be Dowable as any other Husband or Wife may or might claim have or enjoy And the Child or Children born in such Marriage shall and may derive and make Title by Descent or otherwise to and from any their Ancestors as any other Child or Children may do any Law Statute Restraint Prohibition Ordinance Canon Constitution Prescription or Custom had made exercised or used to the contrary of the Premisses or any of them in any wise notwithstanding And be it further Enacted by the Authority aforesaid That the said Lady Mary shall be and is hereby barred and excluded of and from all Dower and Thirds and of and from all Right and Title of Dower and Thirds unto or out of any the Honours Mannors Lands or Hereditaments of the said Duke And that all Conveyances Jointures Settlements Limitations and Creations of Uses and Trusts of into or out of any Honours Mannors Lands or Hereditaments at any time heretofore made by the said Duke or any of his said Ancestors or Trustees unto or upon or for the use or benefit of the said Lady Mary or any the Issue of her Body or for raising discharging or counter-securing any the Mannors Lands or Hereditaments of the said Lady Mary or any of her Ancestors shall be from henceforth utterly void and of none effect And all and every the said Honours Mannors Lands or Hereditaments of the said Duke or any of his Ancestors or Trustees shall from henceforth remain and be to and for the use and benefit of the said Duke and such other Person or Persons and for such Estates and Interests and in such manner and form as if the said Lady Mary was now naturally dead without any Issue of her Body And also That all Limitations and Creations of any Use Estate Power or Trust made by any of the Ancestors of the said Lady Mary unto or for the use or benefit of the said Duke his Heirs or Assigns out of any the Mannors Lands or Hereditaments of any of the Ancestors of the said Lady Mary shall be from henceforth void and of none effect 13 Januarii 1691. THe Duke of Norfolk's Bill aforesaid having been yesterday received and read The Dutchess of Norfolk presented the following Petition to Their Lordships this Day To the Right Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled The Humble Petition of Mary Dutchess of Norfolk Sheweth THat your Petitioner being Married to the Duke of Norfolk 14 Years and upwards never had or received from her Husband any Intimation of a Misdemeanor on her part against him which joined to her Innocency of the Crime mentioned in the Bill makes this Proceeding before your Lordships very surprizing to her Her Person Estate and Honour which is more dear to her than her Life being now brought in question Your Petitioner humbly prays she may have a Copy of the particular Charge against her with the Names of the Witnesses and reasonable time allowed her to answer the same before any farther Proceedings upon the Bill Mary Norfolk Upon which Petition the following Order was made Die Mercurii 13 Januarii 1691. UPon reading the Petition of Mary Dutchess of Norfolk It is Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled That Sir Richard Reynes Sir Charles Hedges and Dr. Oxenden do attend this House to Morrow at ten
of the Clock in the Forenoon Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parliamentor ' 14 Januarii 1691. After having heard the Civil Lawyers the following Order was made Die Jovis 14 Januarii 1691. AFter hearing this day the Civil Lawyers pursuant to the Order Yesterday upon reading the Dutchess of Norfolk's Petition It is Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled That his Grace the Duke of Norfolk shall bring in the Charge against his Dutchess and particularly to the Person Time and Place by Saturday next at 12 of the Clock Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parliamentor ' 16 Januarii 1691. This Day the Duke of Norfolk brought in the following Charge against his Dutchess The Charge which Henry Duke of Norfolk Earl Marshal of England doth exhibit against his Wife Mary Dutchess of Norfolk before the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled pursuant to their Lordships Order of the 14th of January 1691 is for the Crime of Adultery THe Person charg'd to commit the said Crime with the said Dutchess is John Germaine of the Parish of St. Margaret's in the Liberty of Westminster The Times when the said Crime was committed were between the Months of June and December 1685 and several times since The Places where the said Crime was committed are at Whitehal Windsor and within the Parishes of St. Margaret's Westminster St. Martin's in the Fields St. James's St. Ann's within the Liberty of Westminster And in the Parish of Lambeth in the County of Surrey Norfolk and Marshal Upon which the following Order was made Die Sabbati 16 Januarii 1691. UPon reading this day the Charge which Henry Duke of Norfolk Earl Marshal of England hath exhibited against his Wife Mary Dutchess of Norfolk for the Crime of Adultery It is Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled That her Grace the Dutchess of Norfolk do attend this House on Monday next or some Person on her behalf then to receive a Copy of the Charge against her Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parliamentor ' 19 Januarii 1691. The Answer of Mary Dutchess of Norfolk to the Charge exhibited against her by the Duke of Norfolk before the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled THis Respondent is advised that the Charge exhibited by the Duke of Norfolk into this Honourable House against her as to Time and Place is too general and is not pursuant nor doth answer the end of your Lordships Order of the 14th Instant made upon the humble Petition of this Respondent Wherefore she doth humbly hope and pray your Lordships will not oblige her to make any further Answer till the Duke shall bring in a particular and certain Charge as to Time and Place against her And this Respondent doth the rather humbly insist That your Lordships would please to require the Duke to be particular and certain in these material Circumstances of his Charge against her for that it appears by his own shewing therein that the supposed Crimes objected to her and alledged to be committed were above 6 Years before the Bill was offered to this Honourable House during most of which time at the advice and by the approbation of the Duke was and continued beyond the Seas to ease him in his Charge and Part He frequently declaring that when he should be more easy in his Fortune they should live together M. Norfolk Upon which Answer the following Order was made And the Duke's Second Charge delivered in the same Day Die Martis 19 Januarii 1691. IT is Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled That her Grace the Dutchess of Norfolk shall have a Copy of the Duke's Charge delivered this day against her And that she or Sir Thomas Pinfold do attend this House to Morrow at 11 of the Clock in the Forenoon to answer to the said Charge Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parliamentor ' Which Copy is as followeth The Charge which Henry Duke of Norfolk Earl Marshal of England doth exhibit against his Wife Mary Dutchess of Norfolk before the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled pursuant to Their Lordships Order of the 14th of January 1691 is for the Crime of Adultery THe Person charged to commit the said Crime with the said Dutchess is one John Germaine of the Parish of St. Margaret's Westminster The Times and Places when the said Crime was committed were at Whitehall in the Months of June July August some or one of them in the Year 1685. At Windsor in the Months of July August or September some or one of them in the said Year 1685. In the Parish of St. Margaret's Westminster March April May June some or one of them in the Year of our Lord 1690. And in the said Parish of St. Margaret's Westminster in the Months of July or August 1690. In the Parish of Lambeth in the County of Surrey in the Months of May June July August some or one of them in the Year 1691. Norfolk and Marshal Upon which the next Day viz. the 20th of January 1691 the Dutchess of Norfolk presented the following Petition To the Right Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled The Humble Petition of Mary Dutchess of Norfolk Sheweth THat your Petitioner was served with an Order of this Honourable House late last Night to attend your Lordships this Day by Eleven of the Clock either in Person or by Sir Thomas Pinfold to answer to a new Charge brought in against her by her Husband the Duke of Norfolk Your Petitioner is advised That for her just Defence it is necessary to alledge in her Answer several special Matters relating both to the Duke and her self That in this short time appointed by Your Lordships your Petitioner finds it impossible to instruct Counsel to prepare such an Answer as she is advised is necessary to put in Wherefore Your Petitioner Humbly prays Your Lordships she may have convenient time to put in her Answer to the said Charge And Your Petitioner will ever pray c. M. Norfolk Upon which the following Order was made Die Mercurii 20 Januarii 1691. UPon reading the Petition of Mary Dutchess of Norfolk praying that She may have convenient time for answering to the Charge put in against her by his Grace the Duke of Norfolk Yesterday It is Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled That her Grace the Dutchess of Norfolk shall peremptorily answer by her Self or Proctor to the said Charge to Morrow at Eleven of the Clock in the Forenoon Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parliamentor ' Accordingly January the 21st The Dutchess of Norfolk delivered in the following Answer I Mary Dutchess of Norfolk under Protestation That the pretended Charge of Adultery given against me in the Honourable House of Peers was and is general insufficient and such as I humbly conceive I am not bound by Law to give answer unto Yet knowing my own Innocency and that I am not guilty of the pretended Crime this Protestation being Sacred to me
a Civil Lawyer for her Grace the Dutchess of Norfolk who summed up the Evidence for their Graces severally It is Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled That on Tuesday next at Twelve of the Clock this House shall proceed in the debate of this Business and that then no other Business whatsoever shall intervene And that all the Lords in and about the Town shall be summoned then to attend and that the Officers that summon them give the House an account of what Lords they summon Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parliamentor ' The Matter was accordingly entered upon and after some previous Debates by their Lordships they were pleased to adjourn till the next Day when they proceeded viz. Die Mercurii 17 Februarii 1691. THe Deposition taken at several Times before on the behalf of his Grace the Duke of Norfolk as also those taken on the behalf of her Grace the Dutchess of Norfolk were read at the Table by the Clerk After long Debate thereon The Question was put Whether the Bill Entituled An Act of Dissolve the Marriage of Henry Duke of Norfolk Earl Marshal of England with the Lady Mary Mordant and to enable the said Duke to Marry again shall be Read a Second Time It was Resolved in the Negative Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parliamentor ' The Proceedings of the LORDS upon the Evidence Rowland Owen Examined on the behalf of the Duke of Norfolk against the Dutchess of Norfolk ROwland Owen saith that Mr. Reyner about Six Years since being the Duke of Norfolk's Butler ordered him to carry the things out the Lodgings being open he saw Mr. Germaine in Bed with the Dutchess of Norfolk the Dutchess leap'd out of the Bed and put on a Morning Gown and Germaine hid himself in Bed this was between five and six a Clock in the Evening about a Fortnight before Bartholomew Day he did not tell the Duke he is sure it was Germaine he saw him often twice or thrice a day the outward Door of the Lodgings was shut but he opened it with a Key he had Rowland Owen examined a second time saith he never had the Key of the Lodgings but once that Mr. Reyner gave him the Key when he went as he told him to the Blew Posts in the Hay-Market to bespeak the Dutchess's Supper he saith he saw not Frances Knight then in the Lodgings nor any other Woman but the Dutchess of Norfolk he saith he hath seen Reyner often open the outward Door of the Lordgings when he hath been by without calling Frances Knight he saith that he himself opened the first Door with the Key the second Door was not close shut and the third Door was open he saith two of the Doors are streight forward and the third turns a little on the right Hand he saith he was gone in at the third Door when the Dutchess leapt out of Bed Witnesses produced to the Credit of Rowland Owen EDward Silvester saith he hath known Rowland Owen three or four Years and he hath trusted him in Business and he hath ever been very faithful he hath trusted him in Stores to the King and he might have imbezell'd but ever found him honest and he hath had three or four Thousand Pounds worth of Goods that he might have imbezell'd and hath had opportunities of doing ill things but never did he hath trusted him with every thing he hath he hath had more than 20 l. imbezell'd by others but he never imbezell'd a half-penny He knows not well who recommended him to him he hath an hundred Men now and he knows not that three of them were recommended He hath trusted him with Goods an hundred and an hundred times that he might have imbezell'd and others that he hath so trusted have cozened him and he hath lost 20 l. in a Months time by them He works at our work and that better than twenty that he hath had and he 's no Porter he saith he knows not Mr. Negus nor was not acquainted with him till Yesterday John Jones saith he hath known Rowland Owen above three Years and that he 's a very honest Man and that he ever found him faithful that he lodged in his House and that he might have done him Injuries if he would and he hath been employed elsewhere and he never heard ill of him he believes he 's a Man of a better Principle than to take a false Oath Thomas Cooke saith that he hath known Rowland Owen five years and knows not but that he 's an honest Man and saith that he maintains his Family by his Labour he is his Neighbour and never heard him taxed with any Misdemeanor Witnesses Sworn on behalf of the Dutchess for invalidating the Testimony of Rowland Owen viz. FRances Knight saith she knows Rowland Owen as he was a Fellow-Servant in the Duke of Norfolk's House she hath known him a Year he was running Porter to carry up Coals and Wood he was not trusted with any Keys she was trusted with the Keys to the Lodgings and she always kept the Key to the outward Door to the Lodgings and there was no other Key and she never delivered it to any Body but sometimes left it with the Lady Peterborow's House-keeper she never let this Owen have that Key or any other Key to the Lodgings it was below her to do it he never went into the Inner Rooms no farther than the Steps to the Outward Room he 's a pittyful beggarly Fellow he laid the Steward's Cloath and had no other Livelyhood she lived with my Lady six Years and upwards and all the while had the Key to the outward Door she saith you must first come into the Room called the Footmens-waiting Room then into the Dining-Room then into the Bed-Chamber the Doors are sideways she made the Dutchess's Bed constantly she lock'd the Door and kept the Key in her Pocket she had the Key of the Rooms till the Countess of Westmorland had the Lodgings which was till the Duke and Dutchess left them which was ten or twelve days before Bartholomewtide six Years ago Henry Reyner saith that he knew Rowland Owen Street-Porter he saith that he this Witness could never get into the Lodgings but when he had the Key from Frances Knight he saith Owen never came into the Lodgings but had a Key to a House where the empty Bottles were which was without the Lodgings and he himself could not get into the Lodgings but by Frances Knight he never had the Key in his own Possession he never saw Owen farther than the Passage-Room he saith that the Doors are not opposite to one another he saith Frances Knight never gave him the Key he always found her there to open the Doors or in the Room he never had any Key that would open the Lodgings Owen never told him that he caught the Dutchess in the manner as is said he knows not of any Livelyhood he had besides laying the Steward's Cloath Owen had Wages from the Duke
Hudson Examined on the behalf of the Duke of Norfolk against the Dutchess THomas Hudson saith That the Duke of Norfolk being at Portsmouth he was Butler at Windsor when Germaine and the Dutchess and Cornwall went to play Germaine sent his Footman for clean Linen which he brought the next Morning Mrs. Gwin said to the Dutchess The Dog would have lain with me but she would not lay the Dog where the Deer laid for she knew my Lady Dutchess would accept of him after that he saw a Shirt and a Wascoat in the Closet which my Ladies Woman and Ann Burton took away My Lord being absent we murmured amongst our selves that my Lord was wrong'd I told my Lord whereupon my Master Cragg had me to my Lord Peterborough's Lodging and threaten'd me that he would prefer me to his Brother Richards who turn'd me off in Germany This was he thinks in December or September 1685 Mrs. Gwin spoke this in the Green Room and he was in a Closet hard by and the Door open and so heard it Witnesses sworn on the behalf of the Dutchess for Invalidating the Testimony of Thomas Hudson WIlliam Purchase saith That he knows Thomas Hudson who he says was never Butler to the Duke of Norfolk either at Windsor or any other place He the Witness was Under-Butler himself Keymer was Butler in 1685 and the Witness was Under-Butler He saith Hudson waited on the Gentleman of the Horse and the Steward he was not the Duke's Servant nor waited at the Table that he knows of he was never suffer'd to come into the Room when the Duke or Dutchess was at Play He saith he the Witness was not at Windsor at the time when the Duke of Norfolk was at Portsmouth but he was sent to Drayton in Northampton shire and was then the Dukes Servant as Under-Butler he knows not that Keymer was he saith he is now Servant to the Lord Peter borough Col. Jacob Richards saith That he knows Tho. Hudson he was his Servant he was recommended to him by Mr. Cragg he was his Footman he believes he was in his Service four Months he parted with him because he found him a tricking Fellow he told him his Brother Cragg was to be kill'd by one Curry and another Irishman He the Witness writ to his Brother Cragg and he advis'd the Witness to part with him for he did not think him fit to be trusted in his Travels whereupon he paid him his Wages and gave him Money to bear his Charges to England and sent a Trunk by him One Mr. Negus travell'd with the Witness and his Father who then and now lives with the Duke of Norfolk writ to us that he did not think it fit for us to keep such a Servant for he was a dangerous Fellow or to that effect Hudson never own'd any thing of the Adultery to the Witness but positively declar'd to him he knew nothing of it This was in January 1685. He saith that Cragg writ him word that Hudson must needs be a Tricking Knave He negligently told the Witness this of the Adultery Curiosity made him ask it of him for he had liv'd with the Duke and Dutchess and it was natural for him the Witness to ask such a Question He saith he believes Hudson saw some of his Letters He saith there were printed Papers in the Trunk he sent but nothing of any considerable value He saith Hudson never cheated him of any thing that he knows of he hath trusted him with a 100 l. at a time The Trunk was deliver'd in England and he believes he knew what was in it He saith that asking Hudson whether he knew any thing of the Adultery charg'd on the Dutchess of Norfolk Hudson said he knew nothing of it He the Witness told him that it was said that it was he that had betray'd the Dutchess he said it was a false Accusation for he knew nothing of it Observations upon the foregoing Evidence HUdson swears himself the Duke's Butler at Windsor William Purchase swears that Hudson was never the Duke's Butler Hudson says that they went to Play and that he overheard Mrs. Gwin out of a Closet saying as in the Evidence Mrs. Gwin is a dead Witness and Hudson but a Closet Witness which is little better now Purchase says again that Hudson was never suffered to come into the Room where the Duke or Dutchess were at Play Hudson says likewise that the Servants murmur'd amongst themselves that my Lord was wrong'd and that he told my Lord of it Colonel Jacob Richards Deposes that he himself telling Hudson of a Talk that he had betray'd the Dutchess and speaking of a Noise of the Adultery Hudson made Answer that it was a false Accusation and he knew nothing of it Now as to Hudson's Credit he was Colonel Richards's Footman who turn'd him off as a Tricking Fellow and not fit to be trusted Mr. Negus the Duke's Servant both then and now was of the same Opinion too and advised by Letter the putting of him away as a dangerous Fellow This Story of Mr. Germain's sending his man for clean Linnen over Night and the bringing it next Morning has little in it even supposing the Fact to be true First the Order was given bare fac'd and Consequently no Mystery in it Secondly there was a Set Company at Play and that was not an opportunity for a Love-Intreague Thirdly it is no new thing for People to Sit up all Night at Play and change their Linnen next Morning without any offence to Honesty or good Manners where they may have a Privacy so to do it And if my Lady's Woman and Ann Burton took away the Shirt and Wastcoat as he says they did there 's no great hurt in that neither tho' it 's much to have three such Confidents to such a Secret an under Foot-man Privy to the Intreague of Germain's Man going and comeing and raking in the Womens Closet among the Linnen But still the only Proper Witnesses are kept behind the Curtain Ann Burton indeed is produced and we shall see what kind of Evidence she proves her self in the next Place Ann Burton examined on the behalf of the Duke of Norfolk against the Dutchess ANN Burton saith she was Servant to the Duke and Dutchess of Norfolk When the Duke was gone to Portsmouth she was at Windsor when my Lady went to London with Germain When my Lady came home after Supper she was in great hast to go to Bed when she was undrest she said she would Lock us out because she would not be disturb'd before Eleven a Clock the next Morning tho' the King and Queen should come Hudson told her Germain was still in the House whereupon we laid Chairs on the back Stairs that we might hear him if he came down the Chairs were not removed the next Morning when Germain's Man came with Linnen he said his Master was there My Lady ordered a Fire to be made in my Lord's Room where when she was come