AN EXACT ABRIDGMENT Of all the TRIALS Not omitting any Material PASSAGE therein which have been published since the Year 1678 Relating to the Popish and pretended Protestant-Plots In the Reigns of King Charles the 2d and King James the 2d LONDON Printed by J. D. for Awnsham Churchill at the Black-Swan in Avy-Mary Lane MDCXC To the Right Honourable HENRY LORD BOOTH Baron DE LA MER of Dunham-Massy Lord Lieutenant of the County-Palatine of Chester one of the Lords of the Treasury and one of his Majesty's most Honourable Privy-Council My Lord THat I presume to present this Abstract to your Honour the just Interest your Lordship hath both in it and its Author is sufficient Apology It must never be forgot what good Service Your Trial though Your own extraordinary Prudence and couragious management thereof did to the Publick in stopping that Sluce of Blood which had unjustly been then opened with a Design which had well-nigh effected to suffocate our Laws and feed their Tyrannical Arbitrary Power For 't is evident the Fanatick Plot then like them that made it afterward disserted the Stage and though your Honour 's undaunted Appearance and powerful Aid have never since as 't is hoped they never will dare to appear amongst us the unavoidable Mischief whence otherwise would have followed most Men now are wise enough to apprehend Your Lordship's Vertues indeed have always from a very early beginning rendred You a no less real Friend to your Country than a formidable Enemy to the mightiest of its Opposers And Your generous Courage hath embolden'd You to express it even with the greatest Hazard in the worst of Times You have done and suffered much I 'me sure Your share for the Publick and your Lordship's last generous Essay hath now made all Men very sensible of it so that your Honour's Fame needs not the Aid of my Breath to blow it further Abroad Only I must crave your Lordships leave to say that I am proud of this Occasion to tender your Honour even so small a Testimony of real Gratitude from one who is a Member of a Family that hath been honour'd with a long and uninterrupted Friendship of Yours not only in Your Father's Time but in Your Lordship 's since May Your Honour go on to dazle and outshine all your Enemies in faithfully serving the best of Princes and the most ungrateful of Nations May Almighty God long preserve your Person and Vertuous Family in Grace Health and Prosperity And may this your Trial be the last that ever may entitle You to the Patronage of the like Abstraction is the sincere Prayer of My Lord Your Honours most Humble and Faithful Servant P. N. TO THE READER AS in these ten or eleven Years last past have happened as wonderful Passages within this our Island as ever History mention'd so are the Records thereof surely very valuable to the considering part of Mankind A Collection whereof thou art here presented with in a Volume that will spare thee both in thy Purse and Time without defrauding thee of the least drachm of any material Information Here thou hast the substance of Forty nine Trials consisting of near seven hundred Sheets of Paper and which bought singly as they were published cost five Pounds or more and which now would be difficult to collect at almost any price carefully reduced comparatively to a small Bulk and Price yet so as to preserve a perfect remembrance of Things and Persons any way materially concerned therein As herein was designed nothing of Reflection so must thou expect only an Abstraction And for the Compleatness and Sufficiency of this I submit to thy Censure after thou hast read what follows I say nothing of the usefulness thereof because none can have so little Concern for the Knowledg and Remembrance of past Transactions as not to be aware of it If it be well done I am sure it cannot be ill took A CATALOGUE of the following TRIALS Abridg'd 1678. The Trials of 1. WIlliam Staley Pag. 1 2. Edward Coleman Pag. 5 3. William Ireland Thomas Pickering and John Grove Pag. 13 4. Robert Green Henry Berry and Lawrence Hill Pag. 19 5. Nathaniel Thompson William Pain and John Farrell Pag. 31 1679. The Trials of 6. Nathaniel Reading Pag. 42 7. Thomas Whitebread William Harcourt John Fenwick John Gavan and Anthony Turner Pag. 50 8. Richard Langhorn Pag. 62 9. Sir George Wakeman William Marshal William Rumley and James Corker Pag. 71 10 Andrew Brommich William Atkins and Charles Kern Pag. 80 11 Thomas Knox and John Lane Pag. 85 12 Lionel Anderson William Russel Charles Parry Henry Starkey James Corker Will. Marshal and Alexand. Lumbsden Pag. 98 13 Sir Thomas Gascoyne Pag. 101 1680. The Trials of 14 Henry Care Pag. 112 15 Elizabeth Cellier Pag. 115 16 Roger Earl of Castlemain Pag. 118 17 John Giles Pag. 123 18 Elizabeth Cellier Pag. 131 19 Thomas Twing and Mary Pressicks Pag. 139 20 William Viscount Stufford Pag. 145 1681. The Trials of 21 Edward Fitz-Harris Pag. 190 22 Oliver Plunket Pag. 198 23 Sir Miles Stapleton Pag. 204 24 Georgt Busby Pag. 209 25 Stephen Colledge Pag. 214 26 Anthony Earl of Shaftsbury Pag. 243 27 Charles John Count Coningsmark Christopher Vratz John Stern and Charles George Borosky Pag. 255 1683. The Trials of 28 Thomas Pilkington Samuel Shute Henry Cornish Ford Lord Grey of Werk Sir Thomas Player Slingsby Bethel Francis Jenks John Deagle Richard Freeman Richard Goodenough Robert Key John Wickham Samuel Swinock and John Jekyll sen the pretended Rioters Pag. 266 29 Capt. Thomas Walcot Pag. 274 30 William Hone Pag. 289 31 William Lord Russel Pag. 292 32 John Rouse Pag. 303 33 Capt. William Blague Pag. 307 34 Col. Sidney Pag. 311 35 John Hambden Pag. 325 36 Lawrence Braddon and Hugh Speke Pag. 332 37 Sir Samuel Barnardiston Pag. 351 1684. The Trial of 38 Sir William Pritchard Plaintiff and Thomas Papillon Defendant Pag. 364 1685. The Trials of 39 Dr. Titus Oates Pag. 372 40 Dr. Titus Oates Pag. 384 41 William Ring Pag. 397 42 John Fernly Pag. 400 43 Elizabeth Gaunt Pag. 402 44 Henry Cornish Pag. 404 45 Henry Baron Delamere Pag. 404 45 Henry Baron Delamere Pag. 410 1686. The Trial of 46 Henry Lord Bishop of London Pag. 424 1687. The Trial of 47 William Ld. Arch Bp. of Canterbury William Ld. Bp. of St. Asaph Francis Ld. Bp. of Ely John Ld. Bp. of Chichester Thomas Ld. Bp. of Bath and Wells Thomas Ld. Bp. of Peterborough Jonathan Ld. Bp. of Bristol Pag. 434 The following Petition and Trials were omitted in the former Collection are now added in the Appendix Col. Sidney's Petition to K. Charles II. Pag. 1 The Trial of Charles Bateman Chirurgeon P. 2 The Trial of John Hambden Gent. P. 10 This may be printed ROB. MIDGLEY June 17. 1689. The Trial of William Stayley Goldsmith at the King's-Bench-Bar on Thursday Novemb. 21. 1678. HIS Indictment was for Treasonable Words against his most
Papers that had been charged upon him that they were none of his nor did he ever own them for his nor could he ever make Pictures nor did he ever in his Life and that that very Person whom Mr. Dugdale said he owned he got it to be printed by had denied it before the King and Council Then Elizabeth Hunt the Prisoner's servant appeared who testified That about 7 or 8 Weeks before the seizure of the Papers a Porter brought three Bundles of Papers for her Master in his absence which lay in a Box in his Counting-house a Week or Fortnight before she told him of them And as to Mr. Dugdale that she going to him for Mony he owed her Master after he was in Prison and he not paying her it as he promised she said to him Sir I think 't is very hard that you should keep my Master's Mony from him and yet go and swear against his Life too he said to her There was a great deal of do about his swearing against her Master more than needs but as he hoped for Salvation he did not believe Mr. Colledge had any more hand in any Conspiracy against his Majesty than the Child unborn Mr. Colledge inform'd the Court that this Maid moreover told him in the Tower before he came away that Mr. Dugdale desired to be remembred to Mr. Smith Colledge's Counsel and told her he had nothing against her Master that could touch his Life or an Hair of his Head and that he knew nothing of a Plot against the King and that if he could help it he had as lieve he had given 100 l. he had never spoken what he had Which she own'd for truth and Dugdale then denied evading it by telling the Story another way Then Mrs. Godwin being called appeared who related concerning the Papers that three Messengers coming to search for them on the Saturday after her Brother's confinement and they not finding them she got her Brother-in-law George Spur to carry them away to his House at Busshie to secure them till they should know what they did concern Then Spur being called did not appear Then the Attorny General called for one John Shirland who appeared to be a Man that lived by his Shifts and had been whip'd in Bridewel who swore that Mr. Bolron would have given him 10 l. and an Horse to go down and swear against Sir Miles Stapleton Which Bolron denied Then Smith deposed likewise against Mr. Bolron that he told him as they were traveling that he had as much to say against Colledge as any Body and that if he would speak for him he would evidence against Sir John Brooks for a discourse at Ferry-Bridge Which Mr. Bolron deny'd likewise Then no more Witnesses being called Mr. Colledge began to make his Observations upon the Evidence to the Court Professing his own Innocency as to what had been sworn against him and upon what had been attested for him owning his Zeal for his King Parliaments Church of England and against Popery Relating how he came acquainted with Haynes and the discoveries he made to him of the Popish Plot and of Sir Edmondbury Godfrey's Murder for which the Court interrupted and reproved him as not to the purpose and then he went on to sum up his own Evidence complaining of his close Confinement so that he could not procure that Evidence he otherwise might have done for himself The Statute of Decimo tertio was read to him and then Mr. Colledge very pathetically recommending himself to the Justice of his Jury concluded his Defence Then Mr. Sollicitor General largely summ'd up the Evidence and Mr. Serjeant Jefferies and the Lord Chief Justice did the same Then the Court called for two Bottles of Sack which the Jury divided among themselves at the Bar for their Refreshment in the presence of the Prisoner After which a Bailiff was sworn and the Jury withdrawing to consider of their Verdict the Court adjourned for half an hour and when they returned the Jury brought the Prisoner in Guilty At which there was a great Shout given whereat the Court being offended one Person who was observed by the Cryer to be particularly concerned in the Shout was committed to Goal for that Night but the next Morning having received a publick Reproof was discharged without Fees Then it being about 3 a Clock in the Morning the Court adjourned to 10. At which hour the Court being sat and first Mr. Aaron Smith having entred into a Recognizance of 500 l. to appear the first day of the next Term at the Court of King's-Bench the Lord Chief-Justice after a short speech directed to the Prisoner pronounced Sentence upon him to be Hang'd Drawn and Quartered which was accordingly executed upon him over against the Gate of the Castle at Oxford on Wednesday August 31. 1681. And his Head and Quarters through his Majesty's Grace were delivered to his Relations and by them brought up to London and privately interred The proceedings at the Sessions-House in the Old-Baily London on Thursday November 24. 1681. before his Majesty's Commissioners of Oyer and Terminer upon on the Bill of Indictment for High-Treason against Anthony Earl of Shaftsbury The Grand Jury Sir Samuel Barnardiston John Morden Thomas Papillon John Dubois Charles Herle Edward Rudge Humphrey Edwin John Morrice Edmund Harrison Joseph Wright John Cox Thomas Parker Leonard Robinson Thomas Shepherd John Flavell Michael Godfrey Joseph Richardson William Empson Andrew Kendrick John Lane John Hall THE Lord Chief Justice Pemberton gave the Charge wherein he explained the Nature of Treason particularly from the Statute of the 13th Car. 2. and explained the Validity of two Witnesses and the Jury's present Duty After which a Bill of High-Treason was offered against the Earl of Shaftsbury and Sir Francis Withens moved That the Evidence might be heard in Court Then the Jury desired a Copy of their Oath which the Court granted and then they withdrew After some little time they returned and being called over by their Names The Foreman acquainted the Lord Chief Justice That it was the Opinion of the Jury and they claim'd as their Right that they ought to examine the Witnesses in private But the Lord Chief Justice deny'd that it was their Right but was their Advantage and it was the King's desire it should be publick in which also the Lord Chief Justice North concurr'd and then therefore the Indictment was read wherein the Earl of Shaftsbury was charged with High-Treason for conspiring the Death of the King and subversion of the Government The Jury then desired a List of the Names of the King's Evidence But they were told that they being indorsed upon the back of the Indictment which they were to have out with them it was needless Then they requested to see the Warrant by which the Earl of Shaftsbury was committed but that they being told that the Lieutenant of the Tower kept for his Indemnity could not be granted Then they requested that the Evidence might
Reading should direct as also for giving the said Mr. Bedloe 50 Guinies in Hand and promising him greater Rewards for the Ends and Purposes aforesaid To which he pleaded Not Guilty in Thought Word or Deed. Then the Jurors sworn were Sir John Cutler Joshua Galliard Esq Edward Wilford Esq Thomas Henslow Esq Thomas Earsby Esq John Serle Esq Thomas Casse Esq Rainsf Waterhouse Esq Matthew Bateman Esq VValter Moyle Esq Richard Pagett Esq John Haynes Esq Mr. Reading at first challeng'd Sir John Cutler as being in Commission of Peace and labour'd very much to have made his Challenge good But the Court over-rul'd it in regard Sir John was not in the particular Commission then sitting and for that he could not challenge him peremptorily the Indictment not endangering his Life as it might have been laid but only for a Misdemeanour Thereupon the Court proceeded and the Indictment being read to the Jury Edward VVard Esq of Counsel for the King in this Cause opened it and Sir Creswel Levinz opened the Charge After which Mr. Reading to save time admitting those Publick Passages laid in the Preamble of his Indictment as that Coleman Ireland c. were Executed for Treason and that the Lords in the Tower were accused and impeached in Parliament for this Plot Mr. Bedloe was sworn and deposed That Sir Trevor VVilliams brought him first acquainted with the Prisoner who began with him as a friendly Adviser in publick always pressing him to discover what he knew of the Plot but in private advising him to be cautions and not to run at the whole Herd of Men intimating as if the Ld. Ch. Justice also seemed displeased at his forwardness saying that he would make the Parliament his Friends by proving the Plot the King his Friend in not charging all the Lords and the Lords his Friends by being kind to them That the Persons Mr. Reading most sollicited for were the Lords Petre Powis and Stafford and Sir Henry Tichborn Mr. Roper Mr. Caryl and Corker That he should have Mony and an Estate by the negotiation of the Prisoner at the Bar to shorten the Evidence and bring them off from the Charge of High-Treason That he and Mr. Reading had several Consultations about this matter none of which he did conceal but revealed them presently to the Prince the Earl of Essex Counsellor Smith Mr. Kirby and several others And that he did not give in his full Evidence against VVhitebread and Fenwick a Ireland's Tryal because he was then treating with Mr. Reading who had made him easie That the Prisoner in assurance of his Reward told him he had order to draw blank Deeds to be sign'd in ten days after the discharge of those for whom the Sollication was made That he and the Prisoner had a private Consultation in his Bed-chamber March 29. last when Mr. Speke and his own Man Henry VViggens were hid privately in the Room and over-heard the main of the Consultation and Overture of Mr. Reading At what time Mr. Bedloe was to pen his Testimony as the Prisoner should direct him for the mitigation of the Evidence That when that Paper was finished the Prisoner carried it to the Lords to consider of it And that after they had consider'd of it and mended it as they pleas'd Reading return'd with the Emendations written with his own hand and deliver'd them to Mr. Bedloe in the Painted-Chamber who held them so behind him that Mr. Speke as it was agreed took them unobserved out of his hand Which Paper being then Produced was read in open Court Then Mr. Speke was sworn who deposed That on Saturday morning March the 29th last he was hid behind the Hangings between the Bed's-head and the Wall in Mr. Bedloe's Chamber as was agreed on before and there he heard Mr. Reading's and Mr. Bedloes Negotiation together That Mr. Bedloe asked the Prisoner what the Lords said to the Business and what the Lord Stafford said to the Estate in Glocestershire To which the Prisoner answered That the Lord Stafford had faithfully promised him to settle that Estate upon Mr. Bedloe and that he had Orders from that Lord to draw up a blank Deed in order to the Settlement which the said Lord had engag'd to Sign and Seal within 10 days after he should be discharg'd by Mr. Bedloe's contracting of his Evidence And that the Lords Powis and Petre and Sir Henry Tichbourn had faithfully engag'd and promis'd to give Mr. Bedloe a very fair and noble Reward which should be suitable to the Service he should do them in bringing them off from the charge of High-Treason To which when Mr. Bedloe answer'd that he would not rely upon their Promises only but expected to have something under their Hands Mr. Reading reply'd That they did not think it convenient so to do as yet but that Mr. Bedloe might take his Word as he had done theirs and that he would engage his Life for the performance With much other Discourse all tending to the same effect That on the Monday morning he saw Mr. Reading deliver the Paper to Mr. Bedloe from whom he received it and he and Mr. Wharton read it immediately in the Lord Privy Seal's Room After him Henry Wiggen's Mr. Bedloe's Man deposed That he was concealed under the Rugg upon his Master's Bed at the same time and to the same intent as Mr. Speke was giving the same Evidence as to what had been discours'd of between the Prisoner and his Master in the Chamber which afterwards he and Mr. Speke writ down And that he saw Mr. Reading deliver the Paper to his Master in the Painted-Chamber and saw Mr. Speke take it who went with another Gentleman into the Lord Privy Seal's Room with it After this Mr. Reading began his Defence Protesting his own Innocency producing Mr. Bulstrode only to testify that the occasion of his going to the Lord Stafford was his sending for him which yet he did not without leave from the Committee of Secrets That then he was employ'd by the Lords only to get them their Habeas Corpus's And Sir Trevor Williams being called by him declared how he only recommended Mr. Bedloe to him for his Advise about having his Pardon as perfect as could be The Prisoner owning his being in Mr. Bedloe's Chamber at that time and taking his Evidence and carrying it afterwards to the Lords but that it was purely out of Conscience and to prevent Perjury and the Shedding of Innocent Blood and the Deed discoursed of was only for 200 l. to be paid him by the Lord Stafford within 10 days after he should be discharged pro Consilio impenso impendendo to be secured upon an Estate in Glocestershire the which Mony the Lord Stafford indeed told him when he had received he might dispose of it as he thought fit which Confession the Court declared amounted to the Confession of the whole Charge Then he endeavour'd the bespattering the Witnesses Relating how Mr. Bedloe had vilify'd Dr. Stilling-fleet
but e're long he should find a way to get 1000 l. Then offering to speak to Osborn as to the Thing it self he was not suffer'd as being no Evidence against the Defendants till somewhat had been proved upon them Therefore the King's Counsel proposed to prove that Lane and Osborn who tho laid in the Indictment to join was run away did accuse Dr. Oates and afterwards recant it and that Knox had an hand in all this And to this end Sir William Waller was called and deposed That Justice Warcup and he were order'd by a Committee of Lords before whom a Complaint of Dr. Oates had been brought of the horrid abuse of his two Servants Osborn and Lane to take their Examinations which he did and that Lane's Evidence upon Oath was That he had been induced by Mr. Knox to betray his Master and to swear several Things against him which Knox had drawn up and dictated to him which Osborn writ and he signed them That there were four Letters three or four Memorials and three or four Informations which they had carried Knox accompanying them to have sworn them before Mr. Cheney who not caring to meddle with them they applied themselves to Mr. Dewy who refused them likewise After this Knox took Lodgings for them removing them to several places lest Dr. Oates should hunt them out bidding them stand firm to what they were to do and they should not want for Reward that would maintain them with Footmen and to live well That Knox did at the One-Tun Tavern drop a Guiny upon the Table which he said he would not give because then they might swear that he never gave them any Mony And told them that the Lord Treasurer would never have surrendred himself to the Black Rod unless they had promised to stand fast to what he had dictated to them One part of which Information was that Mr. Bedloe should say to Dr. Oates that the Earl of Danby offered him a considerable Sum of Mony to go beyond-Sea and that Dr. Oates had a Design of abusing Lane's Body That Lane further confess'd that Dr. Oates would be something hasty and passionate but was very Religious and was constant in sending his Servants to Prayers and that he had accused him of a Falshood by the instigation of Knox who incouraged him to it by the Promises of a great Reward That also to prevent a Discovery it was agreed among them that if any one should betray it the other two should murder him That he did likewise declare that the Lords in the Tower would not be wanting to acknowledg the kindness in disparaging the King's Evidence And that at all the Places and several Lodgings and Entertainments they had been at were all at Knox's Charge except twice which might amount to about 18 d. and that he paid And upon the Examinations of Lane and Osborn he found they agreed together to a tittle That he took also the Examination of Knox who said that the Papers he received from Lane and Osborn who said they had writ them out of trouble of Conscience and desired him to go with them before some Justice to swear them denying that he paid for their Lodgings only that he did indeed drop a Guiny and another time 10 s. upon the Bed which they took up but he only lent it them Confessing that the Papers so drawn up and delivered into his Hands were by him delivered into the Hands of the Lord Latimer and were there for some time this Knox belonging to the Lord Dunblane That Knox confess'd also that he sent a Note to Osborn that day he was examin'd which was conveyed to him through the Door to this effect We always Club'd and you paid two Shillings at the Sugar-Loaf Tear this Which was to intimate that they should say he did not bear their Charges Then Justice Warcup being sworn deposed That he also had took Lane's Examination wherein he had confessed as before That also he was by when he was brought before the Lords of the Committee for Examinations and did hear him there first swear the things in these Notes contained and then come afterward and beg their pardon and God's for what he had sworn was false and this too was upon Oath That he heard Knox confess about the Note to Osborn and he took Lodgings for Lane and Osborn in VVhite-Friers by the direction of the Lord Dunblane's Coachman Then one Rix deposed That he help'd Osborn into Dr. Oates's Service and a while after he and Lane came to him and said they were both going off from the Doctor to preferment and should have 100 l. a Year and 500 l. apiece but would not tell how Another time Osborn came to him to borrow a Cravat for he was going to dine with one of the greatest Peers of the Realm at the other end of the Town this Discourse being at VVhite-hall and asking why he would leave Dr. Oates he said Let Dr. Oates look to himself for he had enough against him Then perceiving some Design he gave in his Testimony to Justice VVarcup and upon further inquiry into it the Lords ordered him to send out his Warrants for the taking of Knox Lane and Osborn which he assigned over to him and in a short time after they were taken Osborn then confess'd to Justice VVarcup and Lane to Sir VVilliam VValler Afterwards Rix drinking with Lane in the Prison would have paid but he would not let him for that he had 23 s. which he said Knox had sent him in Another day he came to him and Lane shew'd him a Note which he had put under the Door from a Gentlewoman That if he would stand firm to his Text he should have 500 l. nay he should not want 1000 l. But in case they would not the Lord Treasurer would never have come in and if they did not he would lose his Head And this Lane's Father and Mother told him afterwards and that one Hest did come and tell them so That also Lane told him his Heart was lighter now he had confess'd this and that Knox set him on drew up the Writings and promis'd him those Rewards Then Richard Slightam a Prisoner and Under-Goaler deposed That Knox gave him three half Crowns at one time and promis'd him a considerable Sum to carry Notes between him and Lane and Osborne but he carried none And when Osborne had confess'd he said it would signify nothing because two were better than one Then Mr. Dewy depos'd That at the end of April or beginning of May Knox came to him with two more with him and said the Ld. Latimer wish'd him so to do with Papers ready written which as said were the Informations of one Osborne and Lane who had over-heard Dr. Oates and Mr. Bedloe conspiring against the Lord of Danby but the Parliament then sitting he shifted them off and did not inspect them Then Mr. Henry Wiggens Mr. Bedloe's Clerk deposed That Knox came to him the latter
testified that he being to carry Mrs. Pressicks before Justice Lowther Bolron's Wife said she was sorry for it for she believed her to be an honest Woman and had been a good Neighbour amongst them Mary Walker Servant-maid to Mrs. Lassels Thwing's Sister testified that Bolron proffer'd her 10 l. to swear Thwing was a Priest Then William Bacchus said that when he served a Warrant on the two Mrs. Bolron's to go before Mr. Lowther they said they could say nothing against Six Tho. Gascoyne nor any of the Family Cuthbert Hamsworth said that fie heard Bolron swear Revenge against the Lady Tempest for prosecuting a Suit against him Then the Prisoner endeavoured to prove he was not at Barnborow-hall in 1677. by George Twisley Groom to Sir Tho. Gascoyne who could only say that he used to come there but a night or two in a Year Joseph Cooper said that about a Year ago he heard Mowbray say he knew nothing of the Plot and that he believed Sir Tho. Gascoyne was guilty of no such thing for if he had he should have known it as soon as Bolron and he was a Rogue and a Knave for saying any such thing Edward Cooper sen said he then heard Mowbray say he thought Sir Thomas Gascoyne was not guilty of the Plot. Isabel Heyward a Girle that lived with Bolron as a Servant testified that her Master and Mistrifs falling out she said she would not go to London and if he made her go she would swear that what he had sworn against Mrs. Pressicks was out of Malice Alice Dawson testified that the day after New-years-day was twelve-month Mrs. Bolron said she was sorry for nothing but that her Husband had meddled with Mrs. Tressicks One or two Witnesses more were called but nothing to the purpose Therefore Mr. Justice Dolben summ'd up the Evidence and Mr. Baron Atkins proceeded to do the same And the Jury withdrawing for a while brought in Thomas Thwing Guilty and Mary Pressicks not Guilty And on the Monday following Mr. Justice Dolben sentenced him to be Drawn Hang'd and Quarter'd The Trials of William Viscount Stafford in Westminster-hall from November the 30th to December the 7th 1680. before the House of Peers ON Tuesday Nov. the 30th the Right Honourable Henege Lord Finch Baton of Daventry Lord High Chancellor of England being constituted Lord High Steward for the present occasion and all things fitted for the purpose in VVestminster-hall and both Houses being seated and the Commons all bare VVilliam Viscount Stafford was brought to the Bar kneeling till the Lord High Steward bid him rise and a Chair set for him After which making a short Speech to him concerning the occasion of his appearing there the Articles of Impeachment High Treason against him and the other Lords in the Tower by the Commons of England were read which consisted of seven Heads The 1st That there hath for many Years a Plot been contrived c. 2ly Naming the Persons concerned therein and particularly the Noble Lord at the Bar. 3ly That consults had been held and the Murder of the King resolved on therein c. 4ly That consultations have been for the raising of Men Mony Arms c. 5ly That Commissions had been given and received and particularly a Commission for the Lord Stafford to be Pay-master of the Army 6ly That to hide and hinder a Discovery an Oath of Secresy and the Sacrament had been given and taken and Sir Edm. Godfrey murdered 7ly That the Guilt of that Murder was endeavoured to be put upon Protestants c. The Lord Stafford's Answer to which was then also read wherein he put himself upon his Peers for Trial affirming himself Not Guilty After this Serjeant Maynard Sir Francis VVinnington and Mr. Treby being of the Committee appointed for the Management of the Evidence opened the Charge and Evidence in very excellent Speeches And proposed to prove first the Plot in general and the Guilt of this Lord therein in particular And therefore as to the first Mr. Smith being sworn gave a full relation of his Travels and Perversion and of what he had heard beyond Sea and in England concerning this Plot. How Abbot Montague and Father Gascoyne in France and other Priests and Jesuits told him that if he would turn Catholick he should have Employment among them there and afterwards England for that they doubted not but the Popish Religion would come in very soon and that because as the Abbot said they doubted not to procure a Toleration of Religion and because the Gentry that went abroad did observe the Novelty of their own Religion and the Antiquity of theirs and the Advantages that were to be had by it But one Father Bennet and others said they doubted it not because their party was very strong in England and in a few Years they would bring it in right or wrong That it was Cardinal Crimaldi who perverted him about 1671 to the Romish Religion at Provence and that afterwards he lived several Years in the English Jesuits Colledg at Rome where he hath often heard it disputed and preached and exhorted that the King of England was an Heretick and that there was no King really reigning and whoever took him out of the way would do a meritorious Action particularly by Father Anderton Mumford Campion but chiefly Southwel one of the chief of the Jesuits That when he came away thence for England these Fathers for a whole Month were exhorting that the King of England was not to be obeyed and that in all private Confessions all Persons who might be thought capable of any design were to be instructed that they should use all their Endeavours for promoting Popery That while he was at Rome he read Coleman's Letters of Intelligence once a Month and therein how the Duke and the Queen and the chief of the Nobility were of their side how they carried matters several times the ways the Lord Clifford and Sir VVilliam Godolphin did use to effect the work and that they question'd not to get the Lord Danby on their side too That when he return'd into England he found all the Popish Clergy in great hopes of Popery coining shortly in That he knew of Money gathered in the North but refused to joyn therein That as to the Lord Stafford he knew nothing but that Sir Henry Calverley was turned out of Commission of the Peace through Complaint made to my Lord Stafford of his being active against Popery And that he writ to one Smith that he would not make over his Estate as others did for that he expected some sudden Change or Alteration That the Cardinal who perverted him at the same time spoke of great Assurances that Popery would prevail in England that there was but one in the way and tho that Man was a good natured Man yet they could not so far prevail upon him but that to accomplish their designs they must take him out of the way That now he had been a Protestant two
Plot being then present how that on December 23 1678. he meeting Mr. Dugdale at Stafford upon business he perswaded him to discover and got him examin'd that day and afterwards more fully the next day After him one Mr. Thomas Mort who had been Page to the Lord Powis deposed that he saw Turbervile at Paris and knew he convers'd with the Lord Stafford whom he knew not and came with him to Diep to go over with him and my Lord for whom they waited a fortnight much to their Inconveniency and therefore he or some of the Company said Cursed is he that relies on a broken Staff alluding to the Lord Stafford's Name That Turbervile then told him if he went to Calice he might go over with my Lord but how he came to know that he knew not but he got another opportunity and so came over Then Mr. Powel a Gentleman of Greys-Inn deposed that he heard him mention his knowledg about the Plot about a Year ago but that he did not think fit then to reveal it for fear of his Brother's Anger and because some of the Witnesses had been discouraged and he was afraid he should be so too Then Mr. Arnold one of the Members of the House of Commons deposed that he knew Mr. Turbervile to be a very civil honest Gentleman and that the reason he discover'd no sooner was he told him because the Witnesses that were come in were in danger of their Lives and were discouraged and as long as the D. of York had so great a Power in the Council and the Lady Powis's Brother in those Parts he lived which his Lordship usually calls his Province he durst not for his Life Then Mr. Hobby being sworn gave a very good Character also of Mr. Turbervile whom he had known four Years Mr. Matthews a Divine being sworn gave him likewise a good Character and that he had often discoursed with him and found him inclinable to come off from the Roman Religion and that he had known him four Years Mr. William Seys being sworn said he never heard nor knew any ill by Mr. Turbervile whom he had known two Years Captain Scudamore deposed much the same as to Mr. Turbervile's Credit Then whereas the Lord Stafford had brought his Servants to prove he had not been lame of so long a time the Lords Stamford and Lovelace deposed that they had observed him lame within less than seven Years which his Lordship excused saying it was only his Wearines And here the Managers resolving to call no more Witnesses urged the Prisoner to sum up his Defence that the Process might be closed But he called Mr. Whitby again asking him if he had not once complained of Dugdale to the Lord Aston telling him he was a Knave Mr. Whitby confessed he told the Lord Aston that Dugdale was a Dishonour to his Family in not paying People their Mony when they came for it But he was told afterwards it signified nothing for that the present Ld. Aston would hear nothing against him Then the Ld. Stafford gave into the Court Wright's Letter who being called owned his hand saying That was one which he was hired to write which intimated as if Dugdale had suborned him to swear false c. Then the Prisoner being urged to conclude he protested his Unreadiness and Weakness whereupon the Court broke up and the Lords sent a Message to the Commons that to morrow morning at 10 they had ordered the Prisoner again to the Bar. The fifth Day SAturday December the 4th 1680. About 10 the Court being sat and the Prisoner call'd upon to sum up his Defence he prayed leave to call a few Witnesses more which after some Debate and his Lordships Weeping was admitted And then the Lord Ferrers was called upon to speak his Knowledg of Southall who said he could only speak by hear-say that he had been an active Man in the late times against the King and is counted a pernicious Man against the Government The Lieutenant of the Tower also was called and testify'd that Dugdale coming to make up his Accounts the Lord Aston desired the Lieutenant to be present who said he did not understand Accounts but would get one that did whereupon Dugdale said he would come another time but never did that he saw or heard of The Prisoner began to sum up his Defence and ended with proposing these five Points of Law 1st That there is no precedent for criminal Proceedings to be continued from Parliament to Parliament as this had been to three 2ly Whether in capital Cases they can proceed upon Impeachment and by Indictment first found by the Grand Jury 3ly There is a defect in the Impeachment there being no overt Act alledged 4ly The Witnesses by Law are not competent because they swear for Mony And not having proved him a Papist whether he can be concern'd as to the Plot in general 5ly That there ought to be two Witnesses to every point Thus concluding the Managers vindicated Mr. Southall's Credit sufficiently by the Depositions of the Lord Brook and Mr. William Leveson-Gower who knew him very well to be an honest able good Man and of the Church of England and an eager Prosecutor of Papists Then Sir William Jones one of the Managers summ'd up the Evidence very largely and Mr. Powle another of them proceeded and Serjeant Maynard answered his matters in Law shewing to the third several Overt Acts as receiving a Commission being at Consults and hiring Persons to kill the King To the 2d That an Impeachment of the House of Commons is more than an Indictment To the 1st That what is once upon Record in Parliament may at any time be proceeded upon And then Sir William Jones spoke again And to the 5th said there needed but one Witness to one Act and another to another where the several Acts as here fall under the same head of Treason And to the 4th that he had not proved and however that what Mony the Witnesses had was for their Maintenance only Sir Francis Winnington spoke also to the same heads And then the Prisoner urged that his Counsel might be heard as to those Points who were Mr. VVallop Mr. Saunders and Mr. Hunt and the first proposed to be handled being the last Mr. VVallop excused himself from speaking to it because it lately had been determin'd in the inferiour Courts Then the Lords adjourned into the Parliament Chamber to consider the Points the Commons staying and returning after about an hour the Lord High Steward declared that it was the Lords Will that all the Judges present should give their Opinions whether the 5th Point was doubtful and disputable or no. Then all the Judges consulted privately together and afterward gave their Opinions in the Negative Seriatim first the Ld. Ch. Justice North the Ld. Ch. Baron Montague Mr. Justice VVyndham Mr. Just Jones Mr. Just Dolben Mr. Just Raymond Mr. Baron Atkins Mr. Baron Gregory Mr. Baron VVeston and Mr. Just Charlton After
seemed much concern'd and his Countenance altered and desired to lie down Then Mr. Gibbons deposed That when they had apprehended the Count they carried him to the Mayor's and thence to an Inn for 2 or 3 hours and there the Count asked him his Name because he said he would come and give him Thanks after his Trouble was over he owned his Name Gibbons and that he belonged to the Duke of Monmouth Said he the Duke of Monmouth hath no Command now and therefore how could he take him by his Order He said he did not come upon his Command but he had killed a very good Friend of his and a Country-Man and if Providence had not ordered it otherwise he had killed a more particular Friend of mine and a Master whom he had served many Years He said he did not think they would have done the D. of Monmouth any Injury After which walking up and down he said 'T was a stain upon his Blood but one good Action in the Wars or Lodging upon a Counterscrap will wash away all that Then he asking what the People said he told him the Captain had made a Confession though it was a thing he did not then know the Count said he did not believe the Captain would confess any thing To all this the Count by his Interpreter Sir Nathaniel Johnson reply'd That he came into England with a design to have got a Regiment and serv'd England against France hearing of an Alliance to be between England Holland and Sweedland against France That he lay incognito because he was broke out in Spots on his Arms and Breast and designed to take Physick and avoid drinking of Wine and his Equipage was not come to him till after That he removed his Lodgings the first because it was too cold for him and the second because of a smoaking Chimney That he sent for the Polander over to dress his Horses after the German way which he came to buy and had return'd 1000 Pistols for that end and had bought one Horse which the Count's Brother testified That had it not been for the stormy Weather the Polander had arrived sooner he having writ for him 4 Months ago That he had no Quarrel with Mr. Thynn nor to the best of his knowledg ever saw him That it was strange he should ask a Scullion-boy whether People might ride on Sundays when he himself over and over again has rid upon Sundays to Hide-Park which was testified by Major Oglethorp and divers other Gentlemen That Capt. Vratz visited him on Sunday only because he was sick That he gave the Polander to the Captain because he should have no use for him himself bought him Clothes and a Sword because he wanted them That he absconded because one Markham his Taylor told him he heard him named as concern'd in the Murder and that if the Common People should catch him they would tear him to pieces and so his Friends did counsel him to withdraw That he heard the People say the Murderers follow'd Mr. Thynn's Coach but would not shoot till the Duke of Monmouth was gone out That he spoke of his Apprehension and Imprisonment as being a stain to his Blood And then the Count speaking something of the Repute of his own Family and Zeal for the Protestant Religion and Love for the English c. Sir Francis Winnington summ'd up the Evidence whereat the People made a great shout but were rebuked for it by the Court Mr. Williams did also the like and then the Ld. Ch. Justice gave the Charge and the Jury withdrew and the Court Adjourned for half an hour and then sent for the Jury who brought in Borosky Vratz and Stern Guilty and the County Not Guilty Who being dismiss'd Mr. Recorder sentenc'd the other 3 to be hang'd Who were accordingly Executed in the Pall-Mall on Friday Mar. 10 following and Borosky was afterwards hung up in Chains a little beyond Mile-End by his Majesty's Command The Trial of Sheriffs Thomas Pilkington Esq Samuel Shute Esq Henry Cornish Alderman Ford Lord Grey of Wark Sir Thomas Player Kt. Chamberlain Slingsby Bethel Esquire Francis Jenks John Deagle Richard Freeman Richard Goodenough Robert Key John Wickham Samuel Swinock and John Jekyll sen Before the Lord Chief Justice Saunders at the Guild-Hall London on Tuesday May 8. 1683. THen and there the Defendants appeared for their Trial upon an information against them for the Riot at Guild-hall on Midsummer-day 1682. being the Day for Election of Sheriffs for the Year ensuing To which they had pleaded Not Guilty And the Jury appearing the Defendants Counsel challenged the Array because returned by Sir Dudley North whose legally being Sheriff was now in question Which Challenge was read in French and English and admitted of a long Debate but was over-ruled As was also another Challenge offered on behalf of the Lord Grey The Defendants Counsel then prayed a Bill of Exceptions which also was over-ruled The Jury sworn were Sir Benjamin Newland Sir John Matthews Sir Thomas Griffith Sir Edmund Wiseman Sir John Buckworth Percival Gilburn Henry Wagstaff Barthol Ferriman Thomas Blackmore Samuel Newton William Watton George Villars To whom the Information being read the same was opened by Mr. Dolbin and Mr. Attorn Gen. Mr. Sol. Gen. and Mr. Serj. Jefferies opened the Evidence And then the Common Serjeant Mr. Lightfoot Mr. Wells the Common-Crier Mr. Man the Sword-Bearer Mr. King Sir William Hooker and Mr. Bancroft all being sworn deposed their knowledg about the Method of the City Elections all concurring That the Lord-Mayor always used to summon and adjourn and dissolve the Common-Hall and that the Sheriffs as Sheriffs were no more concern'd in the Case than any private Man Then Mr. Craddock deposed as to the Persons concern'd in the Riot That he was then standing where they poll'd and the Lord-Mayor coming thither also to protest against their manner of Proceeding Sheriff Bethel bid him oppose or resist him for that he had nothing to do there And that this was before the Poll was adjourn'd Mr. Reeves then depos'd That he saw Mr. Shute and Mr. Pilkington encouraging the People to Poll after the Lord-Mayor was gone and that while the Lord-Mayor was there he saw a great Contest among the People some saying he had nothing to do there another cried Stop the Sword stop the Sword whom he laid hold of but some Body got him again from him Mr. John Hill deposed That he saw then Mr. Robert Key Mr. Goodenough and the Lord Grey among the People as also Mr. Cornish Mr. Richard Fletcher deposed That he also was there on that Midsummer-day by Order of Sheriff Shute after the Lord-Mayor was gone to call all Men that were to poll to come forward for the Books were to be shut up and that he could only testify that Mr. Pilkington and Mr. Shute were both there Then Capt. Clark depos'd That when Proclamation was then made for adjournment of the Court and God save the King was
proclaimed above an hundred hist at it and cried No King's-Man no Sword-Man one of whom he laid hold on but the Crowd was great and he was call'd away to guard the Lord-Mayor whom he found down upon his Knees and the People crying Press on press on and God save the Sheriffs He guarded the Lord-Mayor home and came again for awhile and saw the two Sheriffs concerned in carrying on the Poll for some time Major Kelsey deposed That he followed the Lord-Mayor then out of the Court and some cried Stop him stop him and gave a Shout and he saw the Lord-Mayor's Hat upon his Back and he was down himself but the Press was so great he could not tell who was there Mr. Trice Hammond deposed That he saw there that Evening the Lord Grey Mr. Key Mr. Cornish Mr. Goodenough and the two Sheriffs Sheriff Shute making Proclamation himself upon the Hustings because one or two had refused it for the adjournment of the Court and this was two hours after the Lord-Mayor had adjourn'd the Court. Then Mr. Higgins depos'd That when God save the King was said he heard the People say God save the Protestant Sheriffs and cry'd Down with the Sword and after he had attended the Lord-Mayor home he returned thither again and saw there one Free-man whom they call'd the Protestant Cheese-monger calling To poll to poll That he saw Mr. Alderman Cornish come up to the Sheriffs and tell them they were doing right and say to Sheriff Shute You shall have all right done to you That he saw also Mr. Swinnock and Mr. Jekyll the Elder there Mr. William Bell deposed to Mr. Cornish Mr. Bethel and Mr. Pilkington's being there Mr. Vavasor swore to Mr. Cornish and the two Sheriffs being there and that had it not been for Mr. Hammond he had been trod underfoot Mr. Denham deposed That he saw Sir Thomas Player and Mr. Jenks there in the Yard Mr. Farrington swore That he saw there the two Sheriffs Sir Thomas Player Mr. John Wickham the Scrivener in Lothbury Mr. Jenks the Linnen-Draper Alderman Cornish Babington and one Jennings an Upholsterer and that his Toes were trode upon and a mischief had been done him had it not been for Mr. Fletcher and Mr. Hill Mr. Cartwright deposed he knew the Names of none there only that he saw the Lord-Mayor had like to have been thrown down going out of the Hall after he had adjourn'd the Court had it not been for Mr. Shaw and that going to save him he wrenched his back and spit Blood for seven days after Then Mr. Shaw depos'd That the Lord-Mayor coming down the steps there was such a crowd that if he had not catched him in his Arms he had fallen upon his Forehead and his Hat was off Then Mr. Kemp depos'd that Mr. Deagle confessed to him that he was there about seven at Night And Mr. Rigby swore That he saw Master Deagle there among the Crowd about that Time After this Mr. Williams of Counsel for the Defendants urged That none of the Cries or Hissings were fixed upon the Defendants nor were they concerned therein though they were there And that it was a Question Whether the Right of Adjourning was in the Lord-Mayor And if not that then here could be no Riot Sir Francis Winnington spoke to the same purpose for the Defendants And then Mr. Thompson call'd Sir Robert Clayton who deposed That in his Mayoralty there was a Poll for the Election of Sheriffs and that he left the management thereof which lasted five or six days wholly to the Sheriffs as belonging to them and that when it was adjourned from Saturday to Monday he supposed it was done by them he not thinking it did belong to any Body else Mr. Love then deposed That two and twenty Years ago he was Sheriff and upon the Election of new Sheriffs the Lord-Mayor left the management of the Hall to him and his Brother Sheriff bidding them look to their Office never interposing at all and if he had truly he should have bid the Lord-Mayor have looked to his Office The management of the Hall at Elections having always been judged in his Time the Right of the Sheriffs Then Mr. Holt urg'd for the Defendants That this Assembly upon such a Supposition of the Sheriffs Right could not be made a Riot so long as no Extravagances were committed And Mr. Wallop spoke to the same purpose And then Mr. Deputy Sibley deposed That he had been on the Livery every since 1639 and that he never remembred any Lord-Mayor to interpose in Elections till here of late it being always left to the Sheriffs as belonging of Right to them And Mr. Winstanley swore That the Poll in Sir Robert Clayton's Time was managed by the Sheriffs Then Mr. Jackson deposed only That the Crowd was so great he could scarce see one way or other But Mr. Roe deposed That he then saw a matter of an hundred with their Hats upon Sticks crying Damn the Whigs saying the Work was done to stop the Poll. Whence the Defendants Counsel inferr'd That if there were any rudeness those very People that came with the Lord-Mayor were the cause of it After this Mr. Attorny General called Sir Simon Lewis and Sir Jonathan Raymond who were Sheriffs when Sir Robert Clayton was Lord Mayor and they both deposed that they took the Lord Mayor's Directions and that he did Adjourn the Court and they only appointed from Day to Day till the Pole was ended Sir James Smith who was Sheriff the Year after Sir Robert Clayton deposed That he never heard it questioned but that the Lord Mayor had the right of Adjourning And then Mr. Common-Serjeant related the whole passage and deposed That Sir Robert Clayton did Adjourn the Court himself After which Mr. Williams urged particularly in defence of the Lord Grey that he was there only accidentally coming to Sir William Gulston with whom he was treating about selling the Mannor of Corsfield in Essex one Mr. Ireton who treated for him deposing That there was such a treating on foot and that he heard of an appointment to meet again And Sir Thomas Armstrong deposed That he saw Sir William and my Lord together that night about eight a Clock After which the Counsel for the Defendants urg'd That the Case being so probable their insisting upon it would not make it a Riot and that the Assembly was not continued in a tumultuous Manner but with a good Intent and it could not be a Riot unless there were an evil Intention to do some mischief instantcing in the Case of Sir Robert Atkins Then Mr. Attorny General summ'd up the Evidence asserting that Assembly to be unlawful after the Adjournment of the Lord-Mayor and a being present therein and countenancing it was enough to make them Guilty of the Riot The Lord Chief Justice summ'd up much to the same purpose And then the Jury withdrawing for some time brought in all the Defendants Guilty of the Trespass
1684. was brought from thence by Habeas-Corpus to the Bar at the King's-Bench at Westminster where being Arraign'd he was told of his being Indicted and Outlaw'd and thereby Attainted for High-Treason and ask'd what he had to say why Execution should not be awarded against him upon that Attainder To which be reply'd that since he had made an Ingenuous Confession to his Majesty of all that he knew of any manner of Conspiracy against him he hoped That would render him Capable of Mercy and Pardon Upon which the Attorny-General offer'd him a Trial that if he had any thing to say he Defend himself from the Indictment but he Confessing himself Guilty of many things therein declin'd it and threw himself wholly upon the King's Mercy But the Court telling him that the King was the Dispenser of his own Mercy and that they were only to Execute his Justice gave a Rule for his Execution upon Wednesday Sevennight after there being no other Judgment to be pronounced in such Cases as the Court told the Attorny-General when he moved for it the Outlawry it self being the Judgment Which accordingly was Executed upon him on Wednesday the 30th of April 1684. at Tyburn Proceedings in the Court of King's-Bench against Sir Thomas Armstrong June 14. 1684. Sir George Jefferies being Lord Chief Justice SIR Thomas Armstrong Kt. was upon the 14th of June 1684. brought by a Writ of Habeas-Corpus from Newgate to the Bar of the Court of King's-Bench at Westminster and there Arraign'd upon an Outlawry of High-Treason for conspiring the Death of the King c. And being ask'd what he had to say for himself why Sentence should not be awarded against him upon that Attainder pleaded his being beyond-Sea at the time of the Outlawry and desired to be tried upon the Indictment Which the Court refusing to grant him he pleaded the Statute of the 6th of Edw. the 6th which gives the Person Outlaw'd a Year's time to reverse the Outlawry and desired it might be read which accordingly was done But it appearing by the Statute That the Person Outlaw'd ought to render himself to the Chief Justice of England within a Year's time Sir Thomas was told this did not concern him for he had not rendred himself but was taken and brought thither against his Will To which he answered That the Year was not then expir'd fie was there and did now render himself and pray'd Counsel might be assign'd him to argue it in Point of Law but the Court over-rul'd him in it telling him There was no such Doubt or Difficulty in the Matter as to need any such thing Upon which insisting much upon his Innocency and offering to make proof of it if he might be admitted to a Trial he produc'd Holloway's Case as a Precedent for it who had but a little before been offer'd it at the same Place but the Court told him that what had been done therein was meerly from the King's Grace and Mercy and that the King might extend the same Mercy to him also if he so pleas'd but since he had not done so and it not being their Business they must proceed to award Execution upon the Outlawry Upon which Mrs. Matthews Daughter to the Prisoner call'd out to the Court not to Murder her Father For which the Chief Justice caus'd her to be committed to the Marshal and accordingly she wishing that God Almighty's Judgments might light upon them was carried away the Chief Justice saying That he thanked God he was Clamour-proof After which the Attorn Gen. offered to shew the Reasons why the King extended that Grace to Holloway but ought not to extend it to Sir T.A. as not at all deserving any sort of Indulgence or Mercy but that having relation to the Evidence and not to the Outlawry the Court refus'd to hear any thing of it and so proceeded to give a Rule for his Execution the Friday following telling him upon his earnest pressing to have the Benefit of the Statute he had cited the he should have the Full Benefit of the Law And accordingly on Friday the 20th of June he was Executed at Tyburn Mrs. Matthews upon a Petition being before releas'd out of Custody without Fees The Trial between Sir William Pritchard Kt. and Alderman of the City of London Plaintiff and Thomas Papillon Esq Defendant in an Action upon the Case at the Sessions of Nisi Prius holden for the Court of Kings-Bench at the Guild-hall in the City of London on Thursday the 6th of November in Michaelmas Term in the 36th Year of the Reign of King Charles the Second 1684. Before Sir George Jefferies Kt. and Baronet then Lord Chief Justice of the said Court of Kings-Bench SIR William Pritchard late Lord Mayor of the City of London having in Easter Term last brought an Action upon the Case for falsly maliciously and without probable cause procured him to be arrested and imprisoned in his Mayoralty against Thomas Papillon Esq The Defendant pleaded Not Guilty and thereupon issue being joined it came this day to be tried before the Lord Chief Justice Jefferys and the Jury sworn to try this Cause were these Bartholomew Ferryman Thomas Blackmore Thomas Symonds William Whatton John Green Thomas Amy Joseph Baggs Daniel Chandler John Reynalds John Allen Joseph Caine William Withers jun. Then Mr. Munday being of Counsel for the Plaintiff opened the Case to which Mr. Attorney General added something And then Mr. Solicitor General called Mr. Keeling who being sworn deposed That on April the 24th he being sent for by a Letter from Mr. Goodenough came to Mr. Russel's a Cooks-shop in Iron-monger-lane to meet him where were 30 or 40 Persons together By whom while he was gone for a little while his Name was put into a Warrant to be a special Bailiff to arrest the Lord Mayor which he seeming unwilling to do was urged thereto for fear of displeasing the Discontented Party which he said were such as he and the Goodenoughs were of even such as would have killed the King and the Duke that being prevailed upon he went along with the Coroner Mr. Burton and Mr. Francis Goodenough to Grocers-hall where Sir William Pritchard kept his Mayoralty to whom the Coroner came up and said he had a Warrant against him and therefore pray'd him to give an Appearance at the Suit of Mr. Thomas Papillon and another at the Suit of Mr. John Dubois whereupon some Words passed between them and the Lord Mayor refusing to give any Appearance the Coroner bid us execute our Warrants upon which he came up to the Lord Mayor and touched him upon the Shoulder telling him that he did arrest him at the Suit of Thomas Papillon Esq and one Ferdinando Burley arrested him then again at the Suit of Mr. John Dubois and then the Coroner dismissing them and taking the Lord Mayor into his own Custody he went thence to Sir Henry Tulse's and arrested him also Then Sir Henry Tulse being called and sworn deposed that about
four a Clock in the Asternoon Mr. Keeling came with two more to his house and arrested him at the Suit of Mr Papillon and another of them did the same at the Suit of Mr. Dubois telling him if he would not give Appearance he must go to the Lord Mayor who was at Skinners-hall but that they would take his word till the Morrow Morning However he immediately went to the Lord Mayor's-house and not finding him at home he went to Skinners-hall where he found him all alone and no Alderman only the Officers with him where he had been but a little while but was detained and he with him till about eleven a Clock abundance of People being gather'd together about the Door but a Company of the trained Band-Souldiers coming keptall quiet Then Mr. Wells the common Cryer was called and sworn who deposed That he being in the next room to the Hall wherein the Lord Mayor was arrested was presently sent for to my Lord who bid him send out the Officers to summon a Lieutenancy which he did and the Sword-Bearer being not just then at hand the Lord-Mayor bid him take the Sword and go along with him and so they were carry'd by the Coroner to his own house and the Lord-Mayor put up into a little Room by himself and he commanded by him to go and see for Sir James Edwards and Sir Henry Tulse and the Ld. Mayor that now is whom he found to be all arrested before he came Then Sir John Peake was sworn who deposed that upon the News of the Lord Mayor's being arrested he had order from the Lieutenancy to raise his Regiment which he did in a very little time and came with his Soldier to Skinners-Hall where he heard the Lord Mayor was and prevented any stir as it was feared there would have been Here the King's Counsel rested their Evidence till they had heard what the other said to it Whereupon Serjeant Maynard being of Counsel for the Defendant Mr. Papillon told the Jury in a very learned and excellent Speech that the Lord Mayor was as much subject to the Process of Law and Actions as any private Person in the City if he did injury or that which was not right in his Office That the Defendant did then suppose himself to have wrong done him and had therefore probable cause to bring his Action which he had done in a legal Manner against the Lord Mayor Then Mr. VVilliams insisted upon the probability of the cause of Action it being a controverted Question Whether Mr. Papillon and Mr. Dubois or Sir Dudley North and Mr. Box were chosen Sheriffs of London And some were so much dissatisfied with swearing Sir Dudley North and Mr. Rich Sheriffs as thinking them not duly Elected that they would have the Court of Kings-Bench moved for the Writ of Mandamus to swear Mr. Papillon and Mr. Dubois which Mandamus was granted to which the Mayor and Aldermen to whom it was directed made a Return that they were not Elected Sheriffs of London which Return was apprehended to be false and really to try the truth of this Return was the Action brought against the Plantiff which was the only way they had to right themselves and therefore they proceeded regularly and orderly in a decent Manner applying themselves to get an Appearance to their Action For that first they took out a Latitat against my Lord Mayor and by the Attorny gave him notice of it and desired an Appearance so that the Question in dispute might come to some determination But he was not pleased to give an Appearance to that Writ so they took out a Capias gave him notice of it and desired an Appearance but could have none whereupon they took out an alias Capias and the Coroner then told that he should be called upon to make some Return to the Writ which he acquainted the Lord Mayor with and desired again an Appearance which he refusing the Officer was constrained to arrest him and an Appearance at last was given Upon which they declared in the beginning of Hilary or Easter-Term 83. But it falling out that in Easter-Term 83 that that there was an Information for a Riot upon Midsummer-day before about this contested Election which being tried May the 10th was found to be so and the Sheriffs sworn to be duly elected thereupon being satisfied that they were mistaken they immediately discontinued their Action Then Mr. VVard of Counsel also for the Defendant spoke vindicating the Defendant from some unjust Reflections which the King's Counsel had made as if he had caused the Lord Mayor to be Arrested for the furtherance of some designed Insurrection against the King and Government and shewing the probability of the Cause then at that time though it be quite otherwise since the Question of the Right and Election being determined on the other side in the Trial about the Riot at the Election But the Ld. Ch. Justice here interrupting him would by no means allow that to be the Question then determined which raised some Words between them whereat there was a little Hiss begun which made the Ld. Ch. Justice in a great Fury ask who that Fellow was that durst hum or hiss while he sat there threatning to lay him by the heels and make an Example of him saying That indeed he knew the time when Causes were to be carried according as the Mobile hiss'd or humm'd and that he did not question but they had as good a will to it now Then he suffered the Defendants Counsel to call their Witnesses And therefore Mr Brome being call'd and swore deposed That aster he had the Writs he waited upon my Ld. Mayor praying his Appearance and gave him 9 or 10 days to consider and that the Defendants Attorny Mr. Goodenough did threaten to complain of him to the Court if he did not make a Return of the Writ And that when at last he could get no Appearance the Officers named in the Warrant by his Command did arrest him and carry him to Skinners-Hall and that soon aster he himself was taken into Custody and committed to the Compter Then after the Ld. Ch. Justice had cross'd Questions with him to have forc'd him a fall Mr. Cornish was swore who depos'd That Mr. Papillon and Mr. Dubois being at his house in came Mr. Goodenough the Attorny to receive their Orders what he should do telling them the time was almost spent and he had addressed himself from time to time to the Lord Mayor and some of the Aldermen to get them to appear but they would not They told him they had already given him Orders and desired that the matter might be brought to some Trial or issue and that he should desire an Appearance to the Action and if he would give it take it and remember my Lord Mayor is the Chief Magistrate of the City and pray'd him to carry it with all respect and regard imaginable to him The Ld. Ch. Justice then fell violently
upon Mr. Cornish questioning him about his owr and Mr. Bethel's Elections charging the Reason of his being Elected the second time to be because he had not taken the Sacrament and Corporation-Oath exposing him as an intruder into that Office to disturb the Government and as if that was it that was designed now again by this Election of the Defendant But said he do you think the Government will ever suffer it self to be sniveled at and overthrown by a Company of such whining Fellows And do you think to sham People into Offices No I tell you Villany was the Foundation of it and Knavery the Superstructure and it is high time it should be told out since I hear some People begin to doubt of it as a Question Then calling Bethel and Cornish Rascals he said they qualifi'd themselves for an Office only to put the Kingdom into a Flame and that the City was in great happiness and quiet ever since the late times of Rebellion and Confusion till such time as a couple of busy Fellows came to get into the publick Offices And let the whole Party said he go away with that in their Teeth and chew upon it if they will Then Mr. Serjeant being sworn deposed That he being present at Mr. Cornish's house when Mr. Papillon and Mr. Dubois were there he heard them give Mr. Goodenough the fame Orders about treating my Lord Mayor decently as Mr. Cornish had before deposed Then to shew the fair proceedings of the Defendant in the Action Mr. Baker was called and deposed That Mr. Aston telling him he appeared for Sir William Pritchard and had a Declaration from Mr. Papillon's Attorny he entred up a Discontinuance and paid the Costs and had Mr. Aston's receipt for them Then Mr. Ward offer'd that apprehending themselves really chosen Sheriffs they did in a due course of Law sue forth their Mandamus directed to the Plaintiff and the Aldermen and to which there was a Return made both which were then read in the Court and then Mr. Williams offer'd to shew the Reasons why they thought this Return false and thereupon brought their Action And therefore Mr. Gilbert Nelson Mr. William Wightman and Mr. Leonard Robinson were all call'd and sworn Mr. Nelson deposed that he was at the Common-Hall on Midsummer-day 1682 where there was in Nomination for Sheriffs he that is now Sir Dudley North Mr. Box Mr. Papillon and Mr. Dubois that he did see the Poll-Books after they were cast up and the greatest number was for Mr. Papillon And that upon holding up the Hands most in his Judgment were for Mr. Papillon and the Sheriffs gave it for Papillon and Dubois Mr. Wightman deposed That he then did take the Pole in one of the Books and that there were 2400 and odd for Papillon and Dubois Mr. Robinson deposed that he was then also at the Common-Hall and that by the Hands he judged the Majority was much more for Papillon and Dubois than for the other two That a Poll was demanded and granted and in the Evening after the Poll was closed the Books were numbred up and the Sheriffs came down upon the Hustings and declared above 2000 for Papillon and Dubois and some hundreds under for the other two Then here the Counsel for the Defendant declared they would leave it unless further occasion should be given them Then Mr. Attorney-General for the Plaintiff pleaded that the Defendant had not at all proved any probable Cause for his Action for that this matter contended for which was the Shrevalty an Office of Burthen Hazard and Charge could never be a good ground to bring an Action for and that he could have no Title to that Office his Election which was by the Poll being illegally managed by an usurp'd Authority and the Instruments made use of to bring about this Action such as Goodenough and the Cabal at Russel's of 30 or 40 Rioters most of them in the Proclamation proscribed as Traitors and run away from Justice upon the Discovery of the Plot speaking the worst of malice To which Mr. Sollicitor-General added that that Poll by which he supposed his right to the Office was illegal and therefore could afford him no probable Cause for an Action And to prove it so Mr. Town-Clerk was sworn who deposed that he never knew a Poll for Sheriffs till about 5 or 6 Years ago and it was between Mr. Jenks and Sir Simon Lewis and that it was by the direction of the Lord Mayor and the Sheriffs are but Officers and not the Judges and Managers of the Poll without the Lord Mayor's direction Then Serjeant Maynard did plead for the Defendant that however the listing up of 2000 hands might well make him apprehend himself as chosen and that there lay the cause of his Action and his suing for so troublesome an Office might be objected to the prudence of Mr. Papillon but could prove nothing of Malice in him And though the Attorny he made use of was a bad Man yet that did not make all his Clients bad And therefore he lest it to the Jury the Probability or Malice of the Action with the Damages the Plaintiff could possibly have sustained thereby Then Mr. Williams pleaded the doubtfulness of the Question notwithstanding what the Town-Clerk had deposed concerning the right of managing Polls and that therefore they might easily be mistaken and that they brought their Action to try the Right but afterwards conceiving they were out and had no Right they discontinued and desisted and that thus they would leave it with the Jury Then Mr. Ward remembering that Mr. Attorny General did challenge the Defendant to shew that his Action was brought by Advice of Counsel Mr. Baker was called again who deposed that it was by the Advice of Mr. Thompson Mr. Pollixfen and Mr. Wallop Then both sides having nothing more to say the Ld. Ch. Justice directed the Jury in a very long and virulent Speech shewing the improbability of the Cause of the Defendants Action from the Sheriff's having no Power to manage the Poll and the Malice of it from these Circumstances attending it As. 1. for a Man to sue to be Sheriff looks somewhat extraordinary as if he had a mind to do somewhat unusual in his Place especially when a Man has fined for the Office once before as Mr. Papillon did And it is a thing was never known till these unhappy times 2. That for several years last past the Government hath been beset and the Methods of Justice corrupted and all to serve the main Design of subverting the Government by Fellows getting into Office that were obnoxious to the Government and known Dissenters who never thought of conforming but only to capacitate themselves to destroy the Government by packing Ignoramus Juries so that Men took Oaths only to sanctify Villany and Traitors at the Bar were in less danger of being convicted of their Treasons than the Judges were of their Lives And that these things never were till
a Paper to the Court containing Observations upon the Indictment which she desired might be read but it was refused and she bid to give it her Husband Green produced for his Defence the Testimony of James Warrier his Landlord and his Wife and Maid which being found to relate to October 19. was deemed nothing to the purpose Berry produced Corporal William Collet who affirmed that he on that Wednesday Night placed his Sentinels at Somerset-House Nicholas Trollop from seven to ten who confessed that in his time a Sedan was brought in Nicholas Right stood from ten to one who said no Sedan came out in his time and Gabriel Hasket who affirmed the same for his time And Eliz. Minshaw Berry's Maid affirmed that her Master was in Bed that Night by twelve a Clock The Sentinels Evidence was only though material but in regard they could not be so positive but that they might be mistaken by reason of the darkness of the Night and Privacy of the Conveyance their Evidence was not thought substantial Mr. Attorney General then spoke to the Concurrency of Prance's and Bedloe's Evidences and Mr. Solicitor General to the Consistancy thereof After which the Ld. Ch. Justice sum'd up the Evidence and directed the Jury in a very tart Speech against the Cruelty of the Romish Principles Then the Jury withdrawing for a short space brought the Prisoners all in guilty Upon which the Ld. Ch. Justice told them that they had found the same Verdict that he would have found if he had been one with them and if it were the last word he were to speak in this World he should have pronounced them guilty At which Words the whole Assembly gave a great shout of Applause The next day the Prisoners being brought again to the Bar Mr. Justice Wyld who as second Judg in that Court pronounceth the Sentence in all Criminal Matters except High-Treason spoke an excellent Speech to them wherein he shewed them the Greatness of their Crime and gave them good Advice and then sentenc'd them to be Drawn Hang'd and Quarter'd which was accordingly executed upon them at Tyburn on Fryday the 21st of Feb. they all denying the Fact to the last ADVERTISEMENT THE Tryals of Thompson Pain and Farrel tho not immediately succeeding the Preceeding yet relating to the same matter and giving not little light thereto is judg'd not inconvenient to be placed next The Tryal of Nathaniel Thompson William Pain and John Farrel at Guild-Hall before Sir Francis Pemberton Lord Chief Justice of his Majesty's Court of Kings-Bench on Tuesday June the 20th 1682. The Jurors Names were Peter Houblon John Ellis William Barret Joshua Brooks Gervas Byfield Jonathan Lee George VViddowes William Sambrooke William Jacomb John Delmee Samuel Bayly Samuel Howard TO whom an Information exhibited by the Kings Attorney General against the said Thompson Pain and Farrel was read for writing and printing several scandalous Libels about the Death of Sir Edm. Godfrey reflecting on the Justice of the Nation in the Proceedings against his Murtherers Which Information Mr. Thompson opened and Serjeant Maynard aggravated the Crimes therein contained Mr. Clare then was sworn and produced a Copy of the Record of the Conviction and Attainder of Sir Edm. Godfrey As also a Copy of the Inquisition take by the Coroner of Middlesex upon the view of the Body of the said Sir Edm. Godfrey whereby it was found by them that he was murthered strangled with a Cord by Persons unknown Both which Mr. Clare having sworn to be true Copies were read Then the Execution of Green Berry and Hill was attested by the Oath of Capt. Richardson and Mr. Prance and Curtis swore that they and Bedloe were Witnesses at their Tryals Then Sir John Nicholas Sir Philip Lloyd and William Bridgman Esq swore that the two Letters in the Information which were shewed them were the same that were shewed to Thompson Pain and Farrel at the Council and that Thompson owned the printing of both and Farrel owned the bringing of the first and Pain owned the bringing of the other to Thompson both which Letters was then read in the Court. The first which Farrel owned he writ was intitled A Letter to Mr. Miles Prance in relation to the Murder of Sir Edm. Godfrey The Design whereof was to contradict the Evidence given at the Trial of his Murderers and to fix the Guilt upon himself affirming that the Coroner's Inquest were first of Opinion he was Felo de se and there was much Art us'd to procure their Verdict to the contrary That the Body was refused to be opened and the Coroner of Westminster's Assistance rejected and he dismist with a Guiny That he was not dogg'd as was sworn but was seen in several places and about three in the Afternoon about Primrose-hill walking in the Fields That he was found in a place inaccessible by a Horse and in such a posture as inferr'd he could never be thrust into a Sedan That his Body was full of Blood and when the Sword was pulled out Blood and Water very much issued out of that Wound and that part of the Sword which was in the Body was discoloured and the Point which was through was rusty his Clothes Belt and Scabbord were weather-beaten to Rags his Body stunk and his Eyes Nostrils and Mouth were Fly-blown his Eyes shut his Face pale no Dirt on his Shoes nor Horse-hair on his Clothes and that Bedloe's and Prance's Evidence before the Committee of Lords very much differ'd And that all this would be proved by divers credible and undeniable Eye and Ear-Witnesses Dated from Cambridg Feb. 23. 1681. Subscribed Truman London printed for M. G. at the Sign of Sir E. B. G's Head near Fleet-bridg The other Letter writ by Pain was intituled A second Letter to Mr. Miles Prance in Reply to the Ghost of Sir E. Godfrey Which was a Vindication of the First in Reply to the Answer given thereto by a Paper Intituled The Ghost of Sir E. Godfrey Disclaiming the concurrence of any Papists in publishing that Paper asserting for Truth all that had been said therein which was ready to be proved by many Witnesses who were not willing to expose themselves to the fury of that Torrent which then carried all before it in favour of the Plot by appearing at the Trial running over all the Paragraphs of the other Letter asserting what had there been said for Truth endeavouring to wipe off the Objections given in a scurrilous manner imputing Melancholy to be predominant in Sir Edm. Godfrey's Family and that such Accidents were no News thereto c. Dated from Cambridg March 13. 1681. subscribed Truman London Printed for Nath. Thompson 1682. Then was read a Paragraph out of N. Thompson's Loyal Protestant Intelligence Numb 125. Tuesday March 7. 1681. which was a kind of Advertisement of this second Letter's coming out and an Assertion that all things in the first were true and were ready by undeniable Evidence to be made out Then a
he upon which they let him go The Clerk of the Crows said he knew this Spence and that he was very like Sir E. Godfrey Then John Oakeley's Affidavit was read which was made before Sir John Moore Mayor June 22. 1682. and was That he coming by Somerset-House upon Saturday Octob. 12. 1678. the very day on which Sir E. Godfrey was missing about eight or nine at Night he saw Sir Edmond-bury near the VVater-gate and past close by him knowing him very well put off his Hat to him and Sir Edm. did the like to him and having pass'd him he turned and looked upon him and saw him stand still and a Man or two near him And that he told this to Elizabeth Dekin two or three days after and to his Uncle Ralph Oakely of Little St. Bartholomew about a Week after and to his Father Robert Oakely and several others in a short time after Elizabeth Dekin's Affidavit who was his Fellow-Servant before Sir John Moore at the same time hereof and Mr. Robert Breedon's Affidavit who was their Master and a Brewer near Sir E. Godfrey's House made then also that Dekin had told him what Oakely had told her and that before the Body was found And Robert Oakely his Fathers Affidavit made at the same time that his Son had told him the same and his Uncle Ralph Oakeley's Affidavit of the same before Mr. Justice Dolbin July 4. 1683. were all annexed to corroborate his Testimony And whereas it had been reported that Sir E. Godfrey hang'd himself and that one Moore his Clerk cut him down the said Henry Moore made Affidavit before Justice Balam of the Isle of Ely July 28. 1681. That the Report was false and scandalous and that he neither said nor did any such thing John Brown and William Lock also of Maribone made Affidavit before Sir John Moore Mayor June 30. 1682. That they viewing the Body on Thursday Octob. 17. 1678. as it lay in the Ditch found that the Pummel of the Sword-Hilt did not touch the Ground by an handful c.. Benjamin Man also of London Gent. being not called at the Trial tho twice subpoened made Affidavit before Sir W. Dolbin July 3. 1682. That being in the Gatehouse when Green was took and about to be put into Irons and understanding his Crime saying he did not think to have found him such a Man Green thereupon replied He was a dead Man Robert Forset Esq of Maribone made Affidavit also before Sir VV. Dolbin on July 1. 1682. That he was a hunting with his Hounds on Tuesday Octob. 15. 1678. and beat that very place where the Body was afterwards found but there was neither Body nor Gloves nor Cane thereabouts then and that Mr. Henry Harwood who is since dead borrowed his Hounds and told him that he beat the same Ditch the next day and that no Body was there he was sure on VVednesday at Noon George Larkin of London Printer made Oath also before Sir John Moore Mayor March 22. 1681. That he going to see the Body on Octob. 18. 1678. he met Nat. Thompson there who then proposed the printing of a Narrative of this Murder to him desiring his Assistance which they afterward agreed to print and that contain'd how Sir E. Godfrey's Face was of a fresh Colour tho in his life-time Pale a green Circle about his Neck as if he had been strangled c. That there was no Blood in the place and his Shoes as clean as if he had but just come out of his own Chamber which was an evident sign that he was carried thither and that the Coroners Inquest found that he was suffocated before the Wounds were made c. And finally that one of the Jury affirmed that his Mother's Servant searched all those Grounds for a Calf that was missing Monday and Tuesday and at that time there lay no dead Body Belt Gloves Stick c. Farrell it seems was Trustee for Fenwick that was executed and Pain was Brother to Nevill alias Pain who was famous for scribling for Mrs. Cellier and the Papists The Court consulting together Mr. Justice Jones having first set out the greatness of their Crime gave the Judgment of the Court which was That Thomson and Farrell should stand in the Pillory in the Palace-Yard the last day of the Term for an hours space between ten and one and each of them pay 100 l. Fine and to be imprisoned till they had paid it Pain was excused from the Pillory but adjudg'd to the same Fine Accordingly on Wednesday July 5. 1682. Thompson and Farrell were Pillored with this Writing over their Heads For libelling the Justice of the Nation by making the VVorld belive that Sir Edmondbury Godfrey murdered himself The Trial of Nathaniel Reading Esq before the Commissioners of Oyer and Terminer at the King's-Bench-Bar at Westminster on Thursday April 24. 1679. ON Wednesday April 16th 1679 His Majesties Commissioners of Oyer and Terminer did meet at Westminster-Hall in the Court of King's-Bench When and where the Commission was Read and the Grand-Jury Sworn and then Sir James Butler the Chief Commissioner that then appeared gave them their Charge informing them briefly of the Occasion of their meeting desiring them to go together and take the Witnesses being first sworn along with them which they did for about half an hour and then returned finding it Billa Vera. After which the Court Adjourned to Thursday April 24. On which day the Commissioners there met viz. Sir Francis North Kt. Ld. Ch. Justice of His Majesties Court of Common-Pleas William Montague Esq Ld. Ch. Baron of his Majesties Court Exchequer Sir William Wylde Kt. and Bar. one of his Majesty's Justices of the King's-Bench Sir Hugh Windham Kt. one of his Majesty's Justices of the Common-Pleas Sir Robert Atkins Kt. of the Bath another of the Justices of the Common-Pleas Sir Edward Thurland Kt. one of the Barons of the Exchequer Vere Bertie Esq another of the Justices of the Common-Pleas Sir Thomas Jones Kt. another of the Justices of the King's-Bench Sir Francis Bramston Kt. another of the Barons of the Exchequer Sir William Dolben Kt. another of the Justices of the King's-Bench Sir William Jones Kt. his Majesty's Attorney-General Sir James Butler Kt. one of the King's Counsel and the Queen's Attorney Sir Philip Mathews Bar. Sir Thomas Orbey Kt. and Bar. Sir Thomas Byde Kt. Sir William Bowles Kt. Sir Thomas Stringer Serjeant at Law Sir Charles Pitfield Kt. Thomas Robinson Esq Humphrey Wyrle Esq Thomas Haryot Esq Richard Gower Esq After Proclamation made for Attendance the Lord Chief Justice North discharged the Grand Inquest and Mr. Reading being set to the Bar his Indictment was read to him Being for Soliciting Suborning and endeavouring to perswade Mr. William Bedloe to lessen stifle and omit to give Evidence the full Truth according to his Knowledg against the Lord Powis Lord Stafford Lord Petre and Sir Henry Tichborn but to give such Evidence as he the said
And that this Statute was only ad Terrorem and ought to be taken most strictly in his favour The Ld. Ch. Justice then gave a short Charge to the Jury concerning him and set him aside And then the Jury was charged with James Corker as with the other against whom Dr. Oates deposed that he was Benedictine Monk and before 1674 one of the Queen's Priests that he had heard him several times say Mass in a Monks Habit at Sommerset-House and the Savoy and himself had received the Sacrament from him at the Savoy and had seen his Patent from Rome to be Bishop of London Mr. Bedloe deposed That he had seen him wear the Habit of a Benedictine Monk before the Suppression of the Convent in the Savoy and had seen him take Confessions and Absolve in Somerset-House Mr. Prance deposed That he heard him say Mass once at Mr. Paston's in Duke-street about two Years ago The Prisoner's Defence was only a flat Denial that ever he said Mass either in Somerset-house or Mr. Paston's So the Jury was charged with William Marshall as with the other against whom Dr. Oates also deposed that he had heard him say Mass several times within the compass of three Years in a Benedictine Monks Habit and seen him Absolve and consecrate the Host and give the Sacrament at the Savoy Mr. Bedloe could only depose that he saw him once in the Savoy in his Monks Habit and was told he was going to take Confessions Mr. Prance deposed that at his last Trial he heard Marshall say to Corker Tho we are Priests this does not reach us Mr. Dugdale deposed that he also then heard him confess himself a Priest To this the Prisoner pleaded that he made no such Confession or if he did it ought not to be Evidence against him That he was almost a Stranger to the Savoy and Oates was never seen there but once and was not to be believed now because the Jury did not convict him upon his Testimony when he was tried before and that it was now a Prosecution of his former Malice again to accuse him after he had been disbeliev'd For all which false Inferences having been rebuked by the Court the Lord Chief Justice summ'd up the Evidence And proceeded to William Russel alias Napper with whom the Jury being charg'd as the others Dr. Oates deposed that he had heard him say Mass in his Priests Habit and himself had received the Sacrament from him at Wild-house and that he was a Franciscan Friar Mr. Prance deposed that he had heard him say Mass twenty times and seen him give the Sacrament and hear Confessions at Wild-house Sir William Waller depos'd that when he took him he found Religious Habits among his Clothes which he owned to be his To all which the Prisoner had little to say more than denying all Therefore Charles Parris alias Parry was charged to the Jury as the rest And against him Dr. Oates swore that he had heard him say Mass at Wild-house and Mr. Paston's and consecrate the Host and give the Sacrament in Priests Habit. Mr. Prance swore that he knew him to be a Priest and had heard him say Mass at the Venetian Ambassadors and at Mr. Paston's and that he bought Oil-boxes once of him and brought him a Chalice and would not suffer him to touch it till himself had first broke it and that he heard him confess himself to be a Priest The Prisoner denied all and said that he knew not Prance and that he was a Windsor the time that Oates swore he heard him say Mass and produced one Lanscroon and Jacob Painters who testified to his being there from before Christmas 1677 to All-hallontide 1678 but the time Dr. Oates swore to was November before He offer'd the Venetian Embassador's Certificate that he never said Mass in his House which was refused the Embassador being gone away and Monsieur Rivier one of the Embassador's Servants testified he never saw him there but the Court rejected such Testimony And the Ld. Ch. Justice having summ'd up the Evidence went out of the Court and Henry Starkey was next set up with whom the Jury was charged as with the others And against him Dr. Oates deposed that the Prisoner was a Priest and he heard him once say Mass at Mr. Paston's in the Habit and saw him consecrate the Host and receive in both kinds Mr. Prance depos'd that he heard him confess himself to one Mr. Duncomb a School-master that is dead that he was a Priest and heard him say Mass at his House and the Lady Somerset's and Mr. Paston's and had heard him say that he said Mass in the King's Army To this the Prisoner pleaded how he had appeared for the King when he had but 500 Men that he was an Esquires second Brother and had spent in the King's Service above 5000 l. which he had got himself and bled for it before he had it and that he spent his Annuity of 140 l. a Year for the King and had lost his Leg for him and discover'd to him a Plot against his Person State and Government and that he suffer'd to this day for it But as to his being a Priest he said nothing but left it to the Proof which the Ld. Ch. Baron summ'd up And then the Jury was charged as before with Alexander Lumsden against whom Dr. Oates swore that he had heard him say Mass twenty times at Wild-house and had seen him consecrate the Host and had received the Sacrament from him and that he was a Dominican Friar and Procurator General for the Kingdom of Scotland being a Scotsman Mr. Dugdale swore that he heard him confess himself a Priest that day he was taken Mr. Prance depos'd he had heard him say Mass twenty times at VVild-house in his Habit and seen him consecrate the Host The Prisoner said he was a Scotsman born at Aberdeen The Ld. Ch. Baron summ'd up the Evidence and the Jury withdrew for about a quarter of an hour and brought in Anderson Corker Marshall Russel Parry and Starkey Guilty and Lumsden guilty of being a Priest and born at Aberdeen in Scotland Then the Judges went off the Bench and the Court proceeded to Judgment Anderson said he had gone out of England before but that the King kept him telling him he had need of his Service and he had a Protection from the Council-Board The Recorder promis'd him to acquaint the King with what he said but that he must now be sentenc'd Corker said little Marshall said much to little purpose urging his Majesty's Declaration for Liberty of Conscience and that there was no Crime in Priesthood it self Russel only deny'd what had been deposed against him Parry said that he was a French-Man tho of English Parents Starkey pleaded his Merits as he did before And then Lumsden being set aside Mr. Recorder sentenc'd these six to be drawn hang'd and quartered The Trial of Sir Thomas Gascoyne Bar At the King's-Bench-Bar at Westminster before
nor could ever endure him reviling him as having been a poor Boy found at the Door then a Thresher then a Baily and now a Witness for the King To this end he acknowledged that he spoke to Dugdale on the 20th of September in his Chamber but not alone nor about any thing but a Race to be run that day on Etching-Hill which he proved by the Testimony of his own Servants Nicholas Furness a Dutch-man whose Blunder in his Evidence made the Auditory laugh and George Leigh He produced also Thomas Sawyer a Servant to the Lord Aston and Mr. Phillips Parson of Tixal as to the Reputatiof Dugdale who said little more to disparage him than that he ran away from the Lord Aston and was apprehended and would then have been own'd by my Lord as his Servant which was refused and Six Walter Bagot Mr. Thomas Kinnersley and Sir Thomas Whitgrave being the Justices before whom he was brought affirmed That then he took the Oaths of Allegiance c. and protested he knew nothing of the Plot. Then the Lord Stafford offered to prove further against Dugdale that he had offered Mony to some to swear falsly against his Lordship to this end William Robinson a Worcestershire-man affirmed That about Midsummer was twelve-month Dugdale offered him Mony in London to swear against the Lord Stafford and John Morral a Barber in Ridgley in Staffordshire that he proffer'd him 50 l. in Hand and 50 l. more when the thing was done to swear against Mr. Howard Sir James Symonds Mr. Herbert Aston and several others as concern'd in the Plot And Samuel Holt a Black-smith at Tixal that he proffered him 40 l. to swear that Walter Moor carried Ewers away Then the Lord Stafford proceeded to prove that Dugdale deposed at the Trial of the five Jesuits That he communicated the News of Sir E. Godfrey's Death which was on Saturday to Mr. Sambidge the Tuesday following which Mr. Sambidge denies That he so swore Mr. John-Lydcott a Fellow of King's-Colledg in Cambridg and one Charles Gifford who were present at that Trial and took Notes did testify And Mr. Sambidge denied that he heard of the News till Friday or Saturday or that he was at the Ale-house with Dugdale at all but that he was an ill Man and very abusive especially to the Clergy Then the Lord Stafford proceeded against Dr. Oates objecting against him That when he was examin'd before the Council having named many and not naming the Prisoner he said he had no more to accuse and for the proof of this he call'd Sir Philip Lloyd who remembred nothing of it and appealed to the Lords then present but none could speak to it till at length the Earl of Berkley did say That he remembred in the House of Lords when Dr. Oates was asked If he could accuse any other Person of what Quality soever Oates answered That he had no more in relation to England to accuse but in relation to Ireland he had which was after he had accused the Lord Stafford though before he had accused the Queen Then he called for Mr. Dugdale again and objected further against him That he did depose before Tho. Lane and J. Vernon two Justices in Staffordshire Decemb. 24. 1678. That presently after one Howard Almoner to the Queen went beyond-Seas he was told by Geo. Hobson Servant to the Lord Aston that there was a Design c. Whereas this Hobson was not a Servant to the Lord Aston of three Years after the Almoner went and yet here he says presently But Dugdale explained that his meaning was that Hobson told him there was a Design presently after the Almoner went c. Which was contested but at last submitted to Then Mr. Turbervile was called again and the Prisoner objected against him his deposing to the Year 1673 one day and to 1672 the next whence he concluded him to be necessarily perjured But Sir William Poultney who took his Affidavit related the whole Story which shewed him to be mistaken in the Year which he finding out that Night by a Paper he found came and corrected it himself the next Morning And whereas the Lord Stafford had charged him for a Coward and for running away from his Colours he produced his Discharge from his Captain which certified otherwise Then whereas Turbervile had before deposed that his Lordship was lame of the Gout when he waited upon him in France he declared he had not been lame these forty Years and never had the Gout in his Life and his two Servants Furness and Leigh testified the same for the time they had lived with him and who were with him then in France but denied that ever they saw Turbervile with him And whereas Turbervile deposed That he came to England by Calice he said he came by Diep and produced one Mr. Wyborne who testified the same together with his aforesaid two Servants Again whereas Turbervil deposed That when he came from Doway his Relations were angry with him and the Lord Powis and his Lady he affirmed that he was upon his return received courteously at the Lord Powis's House and by his Relations which was testified by John Minhead one that belonged to the Lord Powis and a French-Man And whereas Turbervile said he was disinherited his elder Brother by another Mother testified the kindness of his Relations towards him and that there was no Estate likely ever to come to him there being so many Heirs before him Finally whereas Turbervile also in his Affidavit had said the Lord Castlemain was at the Lord Powis's at such a time which must be either in the Years 1672 1673 or 1674 he called Mr. Lydcott again to testify he was not in Wales in any of those Years who by his Notes which he confessed he had transcribed out of another Book spoke very particularly to the times only the beginning of 1672 he could not tell how to account for nor did Turbervile ever say positively to a Year So the Lord Stafford being asked if he had any more Witnesses and answering he had three or four the Peers thought it too late to proceed and so adjourned into the Parliament-Chamber and the Commons went back to their House to whom the Lords sent a Message that they had ordered the Prisoner again to the Bar at Ten next Morning The Fourth Day FRiday Decemb. 3 1680. about Ten the Court being sat and the Prisoner at the Bar the Ld. High Steward reminding him how far he had gone and where he left off in his Defence desired him to go on Who called therefore John Porter Butler to the Lord Powis who said That about a Year ago in several places in London he heard Turbervil say that he believed neither the Lord Powis nor the rest of the Lords were in the Plot and the Witnesses that swore against him he believed were perjured and he could not believe any thing of it and that as he hoped for Salvation he knew nothing of it neither directly
which the Court adjourned and the Lords sent a Message to the Commons that they had ordered the Prisoner to the Bar again on Monday morning at 10 a Clock The sixth Day MOnday December 6. 1680. about 11 the Court being sat and the Prisoner at the Bar his Petition was read which was for leave to offer a few things more to clear himself and which the Ld. H. Steward told him the Lords had granted He then said that seeing he had received their Order that his Counsel should not be heard touching the continuance of Impeachments from Parliament to Parliament he desired that he might offer them his own Conceptions concerning that urging that they had not yet declared their own Judgments either as to that or whether they did acquiesce in the Judges Opinions praying that his Counsel might be heard as to the other points protesting his own Innocency and Abhorrency of Treason reading then his Case and repeating his Defence c. After which the Lords adjourned into the Parliament Chamber and the Commons returned to their House and received a Message from the Lords that they had ordered the Prisoner to the Bar to receive Judgment to morrow at 10. The seventh Day TUesday December 7 1680. About 11 the Court being sat the Ld. H. Steward took the Votes of the Peers upon the Evidence beginning at the Puisne Baron and so upwards in order the Lord Stafford being as the Law required absent The Ld. H. Steward began then saying My Lord Butler of VVeston Is VVilliam Lord Viscount Stafford Guilty of the Treason whereof he stands impeached or not Guilty Lord Butler Not Guilty upon my Honour The same Question was put to the rest whose Names and Votes follow Ld. Arundel of Trerice Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Crewe Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Cornwallis Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Holles Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. VVootton Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Rockingham Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Lucas Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Astley Guilty upon my Honour Ld. VVard Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Byron Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Hatton Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Leigh Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Herbert of Cherbury Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Howard of Escrick Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Maynard Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Lovelace Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Deincourt Not guilty upon my Honour Ld. Grey of Wark Guilty upon my honour Ld. Brook Guilty upon my honour Ld. Norreys Not guilty upon my honour Ld. Chandos Guilty upon my honour Ld. North and Grey Guilty upon my honour Ld. Paget Guilty upon my honour Ld. Wharton Guilty upon my honour Ld. Eure Guilty upon my honour Ld. Cromwel Guilty upon my honour Ld. VVindsor Not guilty upon my honour Ld. Conyers Guilty upon my honour Ld. Ferrers Not guilty upon my honour Ld. Morley Not guilty upon my honour Ld. Mowbray Not guilty upon my honour Ld. Viscount Newport Guilty upon my honour Ld. Visc Faulconberg Guilty upon my honour Earl of Conway Guilty upon my honour E. of Berkley Not guilty upon my honour E. of Maclesfield Guilty upon my honour E. of Hallifax Not guilty upon my honour E. of Feversham Not guilty upon my honour E. of Sussex Guilty upon my honour E. of Guilford Guilty upon my honour E. of Shaftesbury Guilty upon my honour E. of Burlington Guilty upon my honour E. of Ailesbury Not guilty upon my honour E. of Craven Not guilty upon my honour E. of Carlisle Guilty upon my honour E. of Bath Not guilty upon my honour E. of Essex Guilty upon my honour E. of Clarendon Not guilty upon my honour E. of St. Albans Not guilty upon my honour E. of Scarsdale Guilty upon my honour E. of Sunderland Guilty upon my honour E. of Thanet Not guilty upon my honour E. of Chesterfield Not guilty upon my honour E. of Carnarvan Not guilty upon my honour E. of Winchelsea Guilty upon my honour E. of Stamford Guilty upon my honour E. of Peterborough Not guilty upon my honour E. of Rivers Guilty upon my honour E. of Mulgrave Guilty upon my honour E. of Barkshire Guilty upon my honour E. of Manchester Guilty upon my honour E. of Westmoreland Guilty upon my honour E. of Clare Guilty upon my honour Earl of Bristol Guilty upon my honour E. of Denbeigh Not guilty upon my honour E. of Northampton Guilty upon my honour E. of Leicester Guilty upon my honour E. of Bridgwater Guilty upon my honour E. of Salisbury Guilty upon my honour E. of Suffolk Guilty upon my honour E. of Bedford Guilty upon my honour E. of Huntington Guilty upon my honour E. of Rutland Not guilty upon my honour E. of Kent Guilty upon my honour E. of Oxford Guilty upon my honour Ld. Chamberlain Not guilty upon my honour Marquess of Worcester Not guilty upon my honour D. of Newcastle Not guilty upon my honour D. of Monmouth Guilty upon my honour D. of Albemarle Guilty upon my honour D. of Buckingham Guilty upon my honour Ld. Privy-Seal Guilty upon my honour Ld. President Guilty upon my honour Ld. H. Steward Guilty upon my Honour Prince Rupert Duke of Cumberland Guilty upon my Honour The Ld. H. Steward then declared that upon telling the Votes he found there were 31 that think the Prisoner Not Guilty and 55 that have found him Guilty Whereupon the Prisoner was brought to the Bar and the Ld. High Steward informing him the Lords had found him Guilty He said God's Holy Name be praised for it confessing it surpriz'd him for he did not expect it and that he had only this to say for suspending of Judgment That he did not hold up his Hand at the Bar which he conceived he ought to have done and that though he was tried upon the Act of 25. Edw. 3. yet there being nothing more in that Act than what is included in the Act of the 13th of this King he ought only to lose his Seat in Parliament which was the Punishment there put down for a Peer submitting to their Lordships and desiring their Judgments in these Points Then the Lords Adjourned into the Parliament-Chamber and the Committee of Commons returned to their own House and the Speaker having re-assumed the Chair the whole Body of the House went with their Speaker to the Bar of the House of Lords to demand Judgment of High-Treason against William Viscount Stafford upon the Impeachment of the Commons of England in Parliament in the Name of the Commons in Parliament and of all the Commons of England Then the Commons with their Speaker went back to their House Then the Lords took into Consideration what Judgment was to be given and it was moved that he might be beheaded After some Debate the Judges were asked Whether if any other Judgment than the usual Judgment for High-Treason were given upon him it would attaint his Blood The Judges were of Opinion that the Judgment for High-Treason appointed by Law is to
endeavours to have over-ruled without so much as hearing the Prisoners Counsel for the maintaining it for that they said it was nought because it produced no Record of his Impeachment and did not specify what the High-Treason was for which he was Impeached and that the King had Power to proceed on an Impeachment or Indictment for the same thing at his Election Nevertheless the Attorny General demurred and the Prisoner joined in the Demurrer And then after much arguing a Day was given to argue the Plea till Saturday May. 7. At which time the Attorny General added to the Exceptions he took to the Plea Whether a Suit in a Superior Court can take away the Jurisdiction of the Cause of the Person and of the Fact at the time of the Fact committed To maintain the Plea Mr. VVilliams of Counsel for the Prisoner in a very long and learned Discourse first spoke stating the Prisoner's Case upon the Indictment the Plea to the Indictment and the Demurrer to the Plea Alledging the Difference of an Impeachment from an Indictment and offering some Reasons why this Court ought not to proceed upon this Indictment Then answering distinctly Mr. Attorney's Exceptions to the Plea producing some Presidents of this Courts Prosecution being stop'd by Pleas to the Jurisdiction shewing what had been done upon those Pleas What Doom they had Laying before the Court the Right of the Commons to Impeach in Parliament the Judicature of the Lords to determine that Impeachment and the Method and Proceedings of Parliament submitting it to them how far they would lay their Hands on this Case thus circumstantiated Here the Ld. Ch. Justice declared That all these Things were quite foreign to the Case and the Matter in Hand only was Whether this Plea as thus pleaded was sufficient to protect the Prisoner from being questioned in this Court for the Treasonable Matter in the Indictment before them To which Mr. VVilliams reply'd That 't was an hard matter for the Bar to answer the Bench. After which Sir Francis Winnington pleaded That he conceived that it was confessed by the Demurrer that there is an Impeachment by the Commons of England of High-Treason against Fitz-Harris lodged in the House of Lords Secundum Legem consuetudinem Parliamenti And that the Treason for which he was impeached is the same Treason contained in the Indictment So that now the general Question was Whether an Impeachment for Treason by the House of Commons and still depending were a sufficient Matter to oust the Court from proceeding upon an Indictment for the same Offence Which he learnedly endeavoured to make good by several Reasons as well as Presidents Mr. Wallop pleaded next on the same side whose Province was to prove That the Treason in the Impeachment and in the Indictment was the same and that this was well averred in the Plea Mr. Pollexfen pleaded That a general Impeachment in Parliament was a good Impeachment and the Judges had declared so to the King and Council concerning the five Popish Lords who could not therefore be tried upon Indictments so long as general Impeachments were depending for the same Treason and that therefore this Plea was good both as to Matter and Form c. In reply to vitiate the Plea it was insisted on by Mr. Attorn Gen. Mr. Sol. Gen. Serj. Jefferies and Sir Francis VVithens of Counsel for the King that the Plea concluded not in the usual Form That perhaps this Matter if the Prisoner had been acquitted upon the Impeachment might have been pleaded in Bar to the Indictment but it was not pleadable to the Jurisdiction of the Court That in the Case of the five Lords the Indictments were removed into the House of Lords and that the Judges Opinion given at the Council-Board was not a Judicial Opinion nor did any way affect this Cause After which the Ld. Ch. Justice thought fit not to give present Judgment but to take time for Deliberation Whereupon the Prisoner was carried back to the Tower And on Tuesday May 10. Mr. Attorney moved the Court to appoint a Day for their Judgment on the Plea and for Fitz-Harris to be brought up which they appointed to be the next Morning Accordingly on Wednesday Morning May 11. the Prisoner being brought to the Bar the Ld. Ch. Justice deliver'd the Opinion of the Court upon Conference had with other Judges That his Brother Jones his Brother Raymond and himself were of Opinion that the Plea was insufficient his Brother Dolben not being resolved but doubting concerning it and therefore awarded the Prisoner should plead to the Indictment which he did Not Guilty and his Trial ordered to be the next Term. The Trial of Edward Fitz-Harris at the King's-Bench Bar at Westminster before the Lord Chief Justice Pemberton on Thursday June 9. 1681. THE Prisoner then and there appearing after several Challenges made for the King the Jury sworn were Thomas Johnson Lucy Knightly Edward Wilford Alexander Hosey Martin James John Viner William Withers William Cleave Thomas Goffe Ralph Farr Samuel Freebody John Lockier To whom the Indictment was read which was for High-Treason in conspiring the Death of the King and subversion of the Government the which Mr. Heath Serj. Maynard and Mr. Attorn Gen. opened And then Mr. Everard deposed How the Prisoner was with him on Monday Feb. 21. 1681. having a little before been with him to renew the Acquaintance which had been between them while they were both in the French King's Service and to perswade him to re-ingratiate himself into the French and Popish Interest and gave him by word of Mouth Heads to write a Pamphlet to scandalize the King raise Rebellion alienate the Hearts of the People and set them together by the Ears Whereupon he acquainted one Mr. Savile of Lincolns-Inn Mr. Crown Mr. Smith and Sir William Waller with it And the next day Mr. Fitz-Harris coming again to his Chamber in Grays-Inn he convey'd Mr. Smith into a Closet Sir William Waller failing to come where he both saw and heard the Prisoner ask him What he had done as to the Libel and give him further Instructions about what to write viz. That the King was Popishly Affected and Arbitrarily Inclined That King Charles the First had an Hand in the Irish Rebellion and King Charles the Second did countenance the same c. That the People should therefore be stirred up to rebel especially the City c. That the Day after he coming again he had convey'd Sir William Waller into the next Room where he also might both hear and see shewing him to Copies of what he had drawn up which he marked that he might know them again and see what alteration would be made That Fitz-Harris did them read one of the Copies and amended it adding some things and striking out other things saying The Libel was to be presented to the French Ambassador's Confessor and he was to present it to the French Ambassador and that it was to beget a
July 13. 1683. THen and there the Prisoner appearing he was Arraigned upon an Indictment of High-Treason for conspiring the Death of the King and subversion of the Government To which being required to plead he desired a Copy of his Indictment but being told nothing could be granted till he had pleaded he pleaded Not Guilty And then complain'd of his being arraign'd and tried at the same time desiring a Copy of his Panel having had only some Names of Persons usually upon Juries and that his Trial might be deferr'd till the Afternoon in regard he had a Witness that was not in Town But the Attorn Gen. urg'd the Jury might be called Then the Prisoner desired a Pen and Ink and some to write for him and to have the use of his Papers all which were granted And then John Martin being named the Lord Russel asked if he were a Free-holder of forty Shillings a Year saying that he thought none were allowed but such as were Free-holders To which the Court replied That no Pannel was made in London by Free-holders for that London Estates belonging either to the Nobility or Gentry that lived out of the City or to Corporations London was excepted To this his Lordship urged the Statute of 2 Hen. 5. wherein he said it was positive that in Cases of Life and Death no Man should be judged but by those that have forty Shillings a Year But the Attorn Gen. not allowing the Prisoners Exceptions his Counsel were called and again assigned him by the Court Mr. Pollexfen Mr. Holt and Mr. Ward who learnedly urged what they took to be Law in that Case and were answer'd by the Attorn Gen. Mr. Sol. Gen. Sir George Jefferies and Mr. North the King's Counsel And then it was adjudged by eight of the Judges being present viz. the Ld. Ch. Justice the Ld. Ch. Baron Mr. Justice Wyndham Mr. Justice Jones Mr. Justice Charlton Mr. Justice Levins Mr. Baron Street and Mr. Justice Withens that in case of Treason Free-hold was no good cause of Challenge The Jury-men therefore were called and after the Lord Russel hah challenged 31 of them the following Persons were sworn viz. John Martin William Rouse Jervas Seaton William Fashion Thomas Short George Toriano VVilliam Butler James Pickering Thomas Jeve Hugh Noden Robert Brough Thomas Oneby To whom the Indictment being read the same was opened by Mr. North and the Attorny-General opened the Evidence And then Col. Rumsey being sworn deposed That about the latter end of October or beginning of November the Lord Shaftsbury sent him from his Lodging by VVapping to Mr. Shepherd's to the Duke of Monmouth the Lord Russel Lord Grey Sir Thomas Armstrong and Mr. Ferguson there met to know what Resolution they were come to about the rising of Taunton Their answer was That Mr. Trenchard had failed them that he had promised 1000 foot and 300 Horse but when he came to perform it he could not He thought the People would not meddle unless they had some time to make Provision for their Families That Mr. Ferguson made this Answer the Lord Russel and the Duke of Monmouth being present and the Lord Grey saying something to the same purpose And upon this it was the Lord Shaftsbury prepared to be gone That he was with them at Shepherd's about a quarter of an hour and that there was some discourse about seizing of the Guards at the Savoy and Mews in case the Insurrection had gone on which was to have been on Novemb. 19. and that the Duke of Monmouth the Lord. Grey and Sir Thomas Armstrong undertook to view the Guards and that the Lord Russel assented to all this and the Witness was to have gone to Bristol by the order of the Earl of Shaftsbury against that time Then Mr. Shepherd deposed that in October Mr. Ferguson came to him in the Duke of Monmouth's Name to request the conveniency of his House for him and some other Persons of Quality to meet That in the Evening came the Duke of Monmouth the Lord Grey the Lord Russel Sir Thomas Armstrong Col. Rumsey and Mr. Ferguson one after another That Sir Thomas Armstrong desired they might be private and therefore what they wanted he fetch'd up himself not suffering his Servants to come up That their Discourse was about seizing the Guards and the Duke of Monmouth Lord Grey and Sir Thomas Armstrong went one time to view them and the next time they met at his House he heard Sir Thomas say the Guards were very remiss in their Places and not like Soldiers and that the thing was feasible if they had strength to do it That they met twice at his House and the Prisoner was there both times That Mr. Ferguson read a Paper in the Nature of a Declaration setting forth the Grievances of the Nation in order to a Rising He could not say the Lord Russel was present at the reading of it but Col. Rumsey was who then deny'd it saying it was over before he came Then the Lord Howard being sworn began his long Evidence with a low Voice pretending the News he had just then receiv'd of the Earl of Essex's Fate had sunk his Voice and a long Story of the Designs of the Earl of Shaftsbury an Account of which he had from Capt. VValcot whom he brought acquainted with the Earl of Shaftsbury and by whom the Earl of Shaftsbury sent for him while he absconded at one VVatson's at the end of VVoodstreet and there discover'd to him his Design of the Rising and that he had 10000 brisk Boys ready to follow him whenever he held up his Finger who were to possess themselves of the Gates and would in an Hour's time be 5 times multiplied But that his Design was much retarded by the backwardness of the Duke of Monmouth and the Lord Russel who failed him in not being ready prepared to concur with him in the Country that he then endeavour'd to shew the Earl of Shaftsbury the necessity of having those Lords concurrence in so weighty an Undertaking and proffer'd his Service to bring them to a right Understanding among themselves to this end he spoke with the Duke of Monmouth who deny'd that either he or the Lord Russel had given the Earl of Shaftsbury any incouragement to be so forward because they knew the Country could not be ready to stir so soon That a Meeting was then propos'd but afterwards put off by reason of the Earl of Shaftsbury's fears of being discover'd That the Duke of Monmouth told him that the Lord Russel had been with the Earl of Shaftsbury and preswaded him to put off his Rendezvouz for only a Fortnight against which time they would try to be ready for him But the Country not being ready that Design was disappointed That in October Captain Walcot acquainted him with the Design upon the King with which he acquainted the Duke of Monmouth who said he would never suffer it and they did all they could to prevent it This failing the
was his unhappiness he had no Witnesses to call The Ld. Ch. Justice therefore in a few words summing up the Evidence the Jury presently brought him in Guilty The Trial of Capt. William Blague at the Old-Baily on Friday July 13. 1683. THE Prisoner having been Arraigned the day before and pleaded Not Guilty to an Indictment for High-Treason for conspiring the Death of the King and subversion of the Government was then and there set again to the Bar and making no Challenges the former Jury was sworn viz. Robert Beddingfield John Pelling William Windbury Theophilus Man John Short sen Thomas Nicholas Richard Hoare Thomas Barnes Henry Robins Henry Kemp. Edward Raddish Edward Kemp. To whom the Indictment being read and briefly opened by Mr. North and Serjeant Jefferies Thomas Leigh deposed That the Prisoner in discourse with him and Goodneough about seizing the Tower told them that the only way was to do it with Mortar-Pieces that he would venture his own Ship and provide 200 Men and lay his own Ship on Southwark side and make up his 14 Guns he had already 24 and would undertake once in 20 times to dismount the five Pieces that fac'd towards Southwark-side That he ask'd Goodenough what Mony was provided who answering 40000 l. He answered the Seamen would swallow that up presently to which Goodenough replied there was more provided at any time Mate Lee swore That the Prisoner told him as they were in a Coach together that one of these days they should have a Ball to toss which afterwards he understood by Rouse and Leigh was the Ball that was to be toss'd on Black-Heath That about six Weeks ago Capt. Blague and he walking about the Tower and discoursing of seizing it his way was to scale it but the Captain said the best was to shoot Mortar-pieces on Southwark-side but about the Ship he could say nothing The Prisoner's Defence was That his Business with Rouse was to procure him Mony as being a Broker which brought him sometimes into Goodenough's Company but that he never discours'd about any Publick Affairs and as to the seizing the Tower it was only accidental Discourse And as for his 200 Men it was impossible his Vessel being but a Pink which had been in his Possession but three Weeks and what Arms he had he bought therewith and that he never heard any thing about either a Ball or Bank of Mony Calling his Witnesses Mr. VVright declared That he had waited on the Captain ever since he had been shipp'd and was in his Pay before he had the Ship in possession Robert Chappel Carpenter declar'd The Vessel was not able to do any Service three Weeks ago and that he had been shipp'd four Months and an half to go for New-York One Bellinger the Chirurgeon declared That he had belonged to the Ship seven Weeks and to the Captain before he had a Ship and for Guns belonging to the Ship there were fourteen Saker-Guns of which four were Wooden ones six above Deck and four in the Hold. The Lord Chief Justice then summ'd up the Evidence taking notice to the Jury that these Men belonged to the Captain a great while ago and that there was only one Evidence that did affect him Wherefore the Jury Withdrawing in a short time returned and brought him in Not Guilty THE next day being Saturday July 14. 1683. the Lord Russel Capt. VValcot Mr. Rouse and VVilliam Hone were brought to the Bar to receive Sentence Where the Lord Russel desired to hear his Indictment read in English which was granted and thereupon demanded an Arrest of Judgment because there had been no Evidence of his conspiring the Death of the King as it was in the Indictment but only of levying War But the Verdict being past the Court told him they must go by what the Jury had found and not the Evidence and therefore Sentence was pass'd upon him to be Drawn Hang'd and Quarter'd Capt. VValcot had nothing to say but desired that his Son and some Friends might come and see him Hone had no more to say but begg'd the same favour Rouse insisted on some Disadvantages he had when he came on his Trial and some difference between the Indictment and their Oaths but Verdict being past Judgment was given against them three as against the Lord Russel And upon Friday July 20. following VValcot being drawn to Tyburn in one Hurdle and Rouse and Hone in another and there put into a Cart attended by Dr. Cartwright the Dean of Rippon and the Ordinary of Newgate who urged them much to discover all they knew of the Plot after they had spoke to the People were executed accordingly The next day being Saturday July 21. the Lord Russel having taken leave of his Lady the Lord Cavendish and several others of his Friends at Newgate took Coach with Dr. Tillotson and Dr. Burnet who accompanied him to the Scaffold built in Lincolns-Inn-Fields where he deliver'd his Speech to the Sheriff and after some Preparation he ordered the Executioner after he had lain down a small moment to do his Office without a Sign and so his Head at three blows was severed from his Body and ordered by the Sheriff to be delivered to his Lordship's Friends and Servants as being given them by his Majesty's Favour and Bounty The Trial of Algernon Sidney Esq before the Lord Chief Justice Jeffreys at the King's-Bench Bar at Westminster on the 7th 21st and 27th of November 1683. UPON Wednesday Nov. the 7th 1683. Algernon Sidney Esq was arraigned at the Kings-Bench Bar upon an Indictment of High Treason for conspiring the Death of the King and intending to raise a Rebellion in this Kingdom Which Indictment he excepted against as erroneous several Crimes being put together therein distinct in nature one from another and distinguished by Law offering to the Court a Parchment wherein were his Exceptions to the Bill but it was refused and he sorced to plead which he did at length Not Guilty And then he desired a Copy of the Indictment which was denyed him but upon his Request it was read to him again in Latin and his Trial appointed to be on Wednesday Novemb. the 21st 1683. Then and there the Prisoner again appearing he desired Pen Ink and Paper and that Mr. VVinn and Mr. Gibs might write for him which were granted him and then he shewed the reason he had before to desire a Copy of his Indictment which the Lord Stafford and the other Lords in the Tower had urging it for Law upon the Statute of 46 Edw. 3. But the Court over-ruled it Then the Clerk of the Crown called the Jury and after several Challenges the Jurors were John Anger Richard VVhite VVilliam Linn Lawrence VVood Adam Andrews Emery Arguise Josias Clerke George Glisby Nicholas-Baxter VVilliam Reeves VVilliam Grove John Burt. To whom the Indictment being read Mr. Dolben opened the same and the Attorney General opened the Evidence and then Mr. VVest was called against whom the Prisoner excepted
of the Season had chang'd their Opinion so that now they disbelived that which they believed before and perhaps for as little Reason as they believed him at first For he could not expect that a Man who believes without a Principle should not recant that Belief without a Reason But the Court call'd this a Reflection and spar'd him not for it The other part of his Defence consisted of his endeavouring to prove that he was here seen in London in April and May 1678. To this end Mrs. Cicilia Mayo Sir Richard Barker's House-keeper deposed That she saw Dr. Oates at her Master's House in Barbacan the latter end of Apr. or beginning of May being about a Week before Whitsontide in that Year the Plot broke out That the Coachman told her he had been there once or twice before but this was the first time she saw him he having on grey Clothes a white Hat and a short Periwig and dined there with her Lady's Sister and others Sir Richard being then sick in the Country That he came afterwards when she saw him in black Clothes a longer Periwig which was brown That she never knew the Prisoner before then but they told her who it was Then John Butler Sir Richard Barker's Coachman deposed That he also saw Mr. Oates at his Master's House the beginning of May before the Plot in a disguise having on a grey Coat and white Hat and his Hair cut short but without a Periwig enquiring for Dr. Tongue Mrs. Mayo then also looking upon him in the Court through the Window And that afterwards he came in a Cinnamon-coloured Coat and green Ribbons and a long black Periwig and that he dined there several â—â—mes Then Philip Page Sir Richard Barker's Man that used to make up his Physick for him deposed That he remembred he did see the Prisoner at his Masters in grey Clothes but he was not certain as to the time only he believes it was in May. Then Mr. Walker a Minister deposed he met the Prisoner in a Disguise between St. Martin's-Lane and Leicester-Fields not exactly remembring the Time when only he thought it about a Year and a quarter before he was first examin'd and that the Elm-Trees were then budded forth as big as an Hazle-Nut After this reflecting on the discredit the St. Omers Witnesses had once been in and of their not prosecuting of this Cause before this time he concluded his Evidence And the King's Counsel proceeded to answer his Defence producing the Records of Sir George Wakeman and Earl of Castlemaine's Trials to prove that his Evidence there was not believed which were read and Sir George Wakeman being sworn deposed what it was the Prisoner then swore against him and protested the falsity of it and his own Innocency The same also the Earl of Castlemain did in like manner And then the Lords Journals were produced where it was recorded that the Prisoner said he could accuse no Body else but those that he named and yet soon after he accused the present King and the Queen-Dowager but this upon search being not found to be a Record upon Oath it was not thought valid Evidence Therefore they proceeded to prove his Subornation of one Clay which was a Witness for the Prisoner at the Trial of the five Jesuits whom now he did not call and of Mr. Smith the School-master of Islington To this end part of Oates's Narative was read out of the Lords Journal wherein he accused this William Smith as concerned in the Plot as endeavouring to vilify the House of Commons c. And then a Certificate was read under Oates's Hand of this Smith's Honesty not three days before the Trial of the five Jesuits whence they would infer he had been tampering with him the which Smith himself being sworn was ready to have deposed but the Ld. Ch. Justice would not admit him to swear that he did forswear himself because such should never have the Countenance of ever being Witnesses again Therefore they proceeded to prove the Subornation of Clay and to this end Lawrence Davenport in whose keeping Clay was in Prison deposed that Sir William Waller and the Prisoner did hang'd for that they could prove him to be a Priest unless he would swear for Oates that he dined with him at Mr. Howards in May which he consented to so he might have his Mony restored that was taken from him saying he had been a Rogue before and did not know what he might be And this another Witness produced swore that Davenport told to him the next day in Prison Then Mr. Howard deposed That Clay was mistaken in his Testimony given at the Trials of the five Jesuits in being July and not May 1678 that he and Oates were at his House about which time there was no question of his being in England Then they read out of Oates's Narrative again wherein he had said how he return'd three or four days after the Consult of April 24 was over observing hence how his own Witnesses contradicted him who had deposed that they saw him here in London the latter end of May. And here the Counsel for the King concluding their Evidence Dr. Oates proceeded with his Defence only shewing out of the Lords Journal a Copy of their Resolve That there was a Plot and of their summoning up before them Thomas Bickley of Chichester for vilifying Dr. Oates and thereupon turning him but out of Commission objecting five things against their Evidence 1. Their Religion A Papist not being a good Witness in a Cause of Religion appealing to the Heavens Which the Ld. Ch. Justice call'd a Common-wealth appeal and bid him to be took away falling very foul upon the poor Doctor But stood in 't that 't was Law and the Lord Cooke's practice quoting Bulstrode's Reports 2d Part 155. He Objected 2. Their Education confessing themselves to be bred up in a Seminary which is against Law quoting 27o. Eliz. cap. 2. and 3. Car. 1. Cap. 2. Which also was over-ruled 3. Their Judgments in Cases of Conscience whereby they own they have Dispensations to swear Lies for the promotion of the Cause 4. It was refused at the Lord Shaftsbury's Trial to suffer the King's Evidence there to be Indicted of Perjury But all this the Ld. Ch. Justice told him was idle and nothing to the Purpose And therefore he went on to sum up his Evidence protesting the Truth of his Evidence and that he was resolved to stand by and seal it with his Blood which the Ld. Ch. Justice told him it was pitty but he should Then Mr. Sol. Gen. summ'd up the Evidence which while he was a doing Dr. Oates beg'd leave to withdraw being weak and ill with the Stone and Gout and having lien in Irons 21 weeks After him the Ld. Ch. Justice summ'd up the Evidence with all the Virulency and Gall his Wit or Malice could assist him And then the Jury withdrawing for about a quarter of an hour deliver'd in their Verdict
one executed the other having a Reprieve The Prisoner then denyed what he had confest in his Examination saying it was false and that he did not know whence Kelloway and Lawrence came nor did they tell him he confess'd he lodged them but that what he had done was ignorantly and that when his Examination was taken he was in a Maze and he did not know what was put down After this the Ld. Ch. Justice briefly summ'd up the Evidence and the Jury brought him in Guilty The Trial of John Fernley Barber at the Old-Baily on Monday October the 19th 1685. THE Prisoner then and there appearing was arraign'd upon an Indictment of High-Treason for harbouring concealing and relieving one James Burton whom he knew to be a Traitor c. to which he pleaded Not Guilty and the same Jury that was for Ring continued To whom the Indictment being read it was opened by Mr. Phips and Mr. Soliciter General and then the Record of the Outlawry of James Burton was produced and the said James Burton being sworn deposed That he came to London out of Monmouth's Army in the West on Wednesday about three Weeks after the Rout that he lodged two Nights with his Wife and then she being acquainted procured him a Lodging at Fernley's where he lodg'd two Nights more and was took there on Sunday Night That he had been gone two Years before being in the Proclamation for being with Rumbold at the Mitre-Tavern within Aldgate That he saw not Fernley till Sunday at dinner and then they discoursed of the Rout of Monmouth's Army Mrs. Mary Burton then swore how she being acquainted with Mrs. Fernley procured a Lodging for her Husband there not thinking him safe at home Then Mr. Reynolds deposed that he took Burton the beginning of August last at Mr. Fernley's House on a Sunday about eight a Clock at Night up one pair of Stairs who was got into the Chimney and tumbled down while he was there with the Soot about him and one pair of Stairs higher he took Fernley for harbouring him who then said he knew not who Burton was After this Burton's Pardon was produced and read whereby he was rendred a Legal Witness Then the Prisoner said he knew nothing of Burton till Sunday at dinner and then he discoursed him about his Escape in the VVest and that after dinner one Mr. Gaunt came to him and told Burton he should get him a Passage in a day or two's time and that he should take no care for Clothes or Money That he designed to have acquainted a Magistrate with his being at his House the next morning and because Gaunt said he would come again he delayed though he himself was a Constable with a design to apprehend them both And to testify his Conversation he called one Mr. William Rush a Distiller who appearing an Officer presently inform'd the Court he was a great Whigg Nay said Mr. Justice Withers if he be a Whigg he cannot be a little one Mr. Rush said Mr. Fernley always demeaned himself well among his Neighbours and was a good sober Man Mr. Justice Withins again reply'd in Scorn A Wapping Man A sober Wapping Man Then Captain Haddock and Mr. Dove were called but refused to come in But Mr. Whittal came in a Plumber who being ask'd if he went to Church answer'd he did constantly Yes said Mr. Justice Withins there were a parcel of them that went constantly to Church Trimingly Mr. Whittal testify'd to Mr. Fernley's sober Conversation and that he went always to Church and he never heard him speak against the Government The Prisoner then added that he was a poor Man and owed Money and he knew there was 100 l. for securing Burton and there was no Gain by concealing him which shew'd he had no design After the Lord Chief Justice then had summ'd up the Evidence the Jury withdrawing brought the Prisoner in Guilty The Trial of Elizabeth Gaunt the Wife of William Gaunt of St. Mary White-Chappel Yeoman at the Old-Baily on Monday October the 19th 1685. THE Prisoner then and there appearing was arraign'd upon an Indictment of High-Treason for harbouring James Burton and giving him five Pounds whom she knew to be a Traytor c. To which she pleaded Not Guilty And the Jury then sworn to try her and Mr. Cornish were these after Mr. Cornish had challenged thirty five Thomas Rawlinson Thomas Langham Ambrose Istead Thomas Pendleton John Grice Thomas Oneby William Clowdsley Richard Holford William Long-boat Steven Coleman Robert Clavel William Long. To whom the Indictment was read and opened by Mr. Phips and Mr. Attorney General And Mr. James Burton being sworn declared how through Keeling he was with Rumbold at the Mitre-Tavern within Aldgate where the killing of the King was discoursed of which he refused to meddle in and never therefore met but that one time but after Keeling had discover'd finding himself in the Proclamation he absconded for two Months and then Mrs. Gaunt procured him a Passage with Rumbold but the Vessel being leakie he durst not venture and so lay hid at his Daughter 's several Months after and then Mrs. Gaunt got him a Passage again and so he got to Amsterdam and she gave him about 5 l. and two Persons more went with him whom she helped away And this he supposes she did for him because her Husband had been with Capt. Walcot and him about seizing of the Tower Then Mary Gilbert Burton's Daughter deposed that Mrs. Gaunt fetched her Father away in order to send him beyond Sea Then Mr. Burton deposed that Mrs. Gaunt came and proffer'd to convey her Husband away c. And then Burton's Pardon was again produced To all which the Prisoner said very little only that she did not know that her Husband was concern'd in the Plot nor would she give any reason why she took so much care to send Burton away but left it to the Jury who after the Lord Chief Justice had summ'd up the Evidence brought her in Guilty The Trial of Henry Cornish Esq before the Lord Chief Justice Jones at the Sessions House in the Old-Baily on Monday October the 19th 1685. THE Prisoner then and there appearing was arraign'd upon an Indictment of High-Treason for conspiring the Death of the late King and Subversion of the Government c. To which after some Complaints he pleaded Not Guilty desiring his Trial might be deferr'd he having had no notice till last Saturday at twelve a Clock and he could get no Friend to him till eight at Night and then he was permitted to speak with no body but in the presence of the Goaler and had been allowed no Pen Ink or Paper The Court here told him he ought to have none without leave given on a Petition preferred by him He said his Children had petitioned the King the Night before to put off his Trial and it was referred to the Judges and that he did not know whether he was committed for High-Treason
the Prisoners Mrs. Gaunt to be burnt and the other 3 to be drawn hang'd and quarter'd which was accordingly executed upon them and Mr. Cornish was hang'd in Cheapside over against Kings-street on Friday October 23 1685. and his Quarters afterwards put up in several Places and his Head upon the Guild-Hall where it stood till the tidings of the Dutch Invasion summon'd it with the other Quarters into the Grave after they had been expos'd in that infamous manner the space of 3 Years The Trial of Henry Baron Delamere in Westminster-Hall before George Lord Jefferies constituted Lord High-Steward on this Occasion on Thursday Jan. 14 1685. THen and there the Court being met the Lord High-Steward's Commission was first read and the Staff being carried between Garter King at Arms and the Gent. Vsher of the Black Rod was with 3 Reverences delivered upon the knee to his Grace and by him redelivered to the Gent. Vsher of the Black Rod to hold during the Service Then Proclamation was made by a Serjeant at Arms for all Persons present except Peers Privy Councellors and the reverend Judges now assistant to be uncovered and for all to whom any Writ had been directed for the certifying of any Indictment before his Grace to bring in the same forthwith After which Sir Edward Lutwich deliver'd in his Writ and Return which were read And then the Lieutenant of the Tower was call'd to bring his Prisoner to the Bar which having done Sir Roger Harsnet Serj. at Arms was called to return the Names of the Peers which he had summoned who were then called over by the Clerk of the Crown and those that appeared were these following who standing up uncovered answered to their Names each making a Reverence to the Lord High Steward Lawrence Earl of Rochester Lord High-Treasurer of England Robert E. of Sunderland Lord President of His Majesties Privy-Council Henry Duke of Norfolk Earl-Marshal of England Charles D. of Somerset Henry D. of Grafton Henry D. of Beaufort Lord President of VVales John Earl of Mulgrave Lord Chamberlain of His Majesties Houshold Aubrey E. of Oxford Charles E. of Shrewsbury Theophilus E. of Huntingdon Thomas E. of Pembroke John E. of Bridgwater Henry E. of Peterborow Robert E. of Scarsdale VVilliam E. of Craven Louis E. of Feversham George E. of Berkley Daniel E. of Nottingham Thomas E. of Plimouth Thomas Viscount Falconberg Francis Viscount Newport Treasurer of His Majesties Houshold Robert Lord Ferrers Vere Essex Lord Cromwell VVilliam Lord Maynard Comptroler of His Majesties Houshold George Lord Dartmouth Master-General of His Majesties Ordinance Sidney Lord Godolphin John Lord Churchill The Lord High Steward then having acquainted the Prisoner with the occasion of this meeting order'd the Bill of Indictment to be read which was done twice at the Prisoner's desire And then the Prisoner deliver'd in his Plea to the Jurisdiction of this Court that he ought to be tried by the whole Body of the House of Peers in Parliament the Parliament still continuing being under a Prorogation and not dissolved and because there was some agitation of the matter concerning this Prosecution upon his Petition in the House of Lords c. To which the Attorny General answer'd that the Plea was not good there never having been so much as any Indictment returned there nor found during the Session of Parliament besides that the Plea was in Paper and English The Prisoner then desired Counsel to put it into Form But it being a Plea against the Jurisdiction no time could be allowed and the Prisoner having no Counsel ready to plead his plea was over-ruled and he pleaded Not Guilty After which the Lord High Steward gave the Charge to the Peers and Sir Thomas Jenner Recorder of London opened the Indictment and Mr. Attorny General the Evidence And then the Lord Howard was first sworn Who gave the same account about the Earl of Shaftsbury's design'd Insurrection as before he had done at the other Trials where he was a Witness to which therefore the Reader is referred The Lord Grey deposed that Cheshire was one of the Places pitch'd upon for the Rising and for that end the Duke of Monmouth went his Progress into those Parts to make his Interest there and that the Prisoner was one he was directed to advise with That after the late King's Death the Duke of Monmouth was at Amsterdam with the Lord Argyle where there was an Account given of the Design that was in Hand of an Insurrection in Scotland and at that time came over to Holland Mr. Crag from Major Wildman to promote and recommend a Reconciliation between the Duke of Monmouth and the Lord Argyle who till that time had acted in separate interests giving some account that Means and Money were prepared This encouraged the Duke of Monmouth to send Capt. Matthews into England to Major Wildman to desire him to acquaint several Persons among whom the Prisoner was one that he was designed to join the Lord Argyle When Crag return'd to the Duke he gave an account that Major Wildman had convers'd with these Persons and that their Opinion was that the Duke should go for Scotland whereby they might know the strength of the Enemy here by their sending to suppress the Rebellion there and also that Major Wildman desired the Duke to bring over with him a Broad Seal to seal Commissions with and to take upon him the Title of King That soon after Crag's return Jones came with a Message to the Duke from England and was sent back shortly after by the Duke with a Letter of Instructions And the Duke intended first to have landed in Cheshire he very much depending upon that County but afterwards considering that the Persons there being of great Quality and Interest in their Country and able to manage it without his Assistance he chose rather to land in the West the Friends he relyed on there not being of that Quality Mr. Nathaniel Wade deposed that at Amsterdam soon after the Death of the late King the Duke of Monmouth and the Lord Argyle had a Consultation together and agreed that at the same time the Lord Argyle made an Insurrection in Scotland the Duke should invade England For which end the Duke sent Capt. Matthews into England to acquaint his Friends among whom he heard the Lord Delamere named to be ready for his Assistance Crag was sent over for Money but could get none and therefore the Duke sent him over again to pawn his Jewels and get what Money he could wherewith he fitted out 3 Ships laden with Ammunition and having before ordered his Friends to repair to their own Countries to be ready he set Sail and landed at Lyme and ordered his March so as that he might most conveniently meet with his Cheshire Friends In pursuance whereof they came to Keinsham Bridge where a Party of the Kings Horse set upon them of whom they took some Prisoners and thereupon thought it advisable not to let the Kings
Messengers attending the Court delivered to the Dean of St. Pauls a Warrant from the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to cause this Sentence to be affixt on the Door of that Chapter-House and to certify them of the due Execution hereof Dated Septemb. 28 1686. and sealed with the same Seal as the Sentence which was annexed thereto but no Persons Names Subscribed To the Dean and Chapter of London The Proceedings and Trial in the case of the most Reverend Father in God William Lord Arch bishop of Canterbury and the Right Reverend Fathers in God William Lord Bishop of St. Asaph Francis Lord Bishop of Ely John Lord Bishop of Chichester Thomas Lord Bishop of Bath and Wells Thomas Lord Bishop of Peterborough Jonathan Lord Bishop of Bristol in the Court of Kings-Bench at Westminster in Trinity-term in the 4th Year of the Reign of King James the 2d Annoque Domini 1688. THese Peers were present on Friday June the 15th 1688 when the Lords the Archbishop and Bishops were brought into Court from the Tower upon the Habeas Corpus Viz. Ld. Marq. of Hallifax Ld. Marq. of Worcester Earl of Shrewsbury Earl of Kent Earl of Bedford Earl of Dorset Earl of Bullingbrook Earl of Manchester Earl of Burlington Earl of Carlisle Earl of Danby Earl of Radnor Earl of Nottingham Ld. Visc Fauconberge Ld. Grey of Ruthyn Ld. Paget Ld. Chandoys Ld. Vaughan Carbery The aforesaid Bishops appearing then and there about eleven a Clock at Mr. Attorney General 's motion the Writ and Return were read in Court Sr. Robert Wright Ld. Ch. Justice Judges Mr. Justice Holloway Judges Mr. Justice Powell Judges Mr. Justice Allybone Judges Then the Bishops being sat in Chairs provided there for them the Attorney General motion'd an Information to be read against them which Sir Robert Sawyer Serj. Pemberton Mr. Pollexfen and Mr. Finch oppos'd being of Counsel for the Bishops requiring a Discharge for the Prisoners because their Imprisonment was illegal the Persons committing having no Authority to commit being said to be Lords of the Council and not in Council and the Fact for which they were committed being a bare Misdemeanour the Bishops as Peers of the Realm ought to be served with the usual Process of Subpoena and not to be committed to Prison and therefore the Bishops not being now regularly in Court they ought to be charged with no Informatian by the express Statute of Edward the 3d. The which Objections caused a long and learned Debate on both sides till at length the Judges over-ruled it only Mr Justice Powell refused to determine without consulting Precedents Then the Information against the Bishops was read the Substance whereof was That whereas the King put out his Declaration for Liberty of Conscience on the 4th of April in the 3d Year of his Reign in which is contained c. Here that Declaration was inserted and on the 27th of April in the 4th Year of his Reign did publish his other Declaration entitled c. Here that Declaration also was inserted which last Declaration he on the 30th of April following caused to be printed and for the more solemn Notification of his favour therein did on the 4th of May following order the same to be read in all Churches c. Here that order of Counsel was inserted After the making of which Order viz. on the 18th of May following at Westminster in Middlesex the seven Bishops being here named did consult and conspire among themselves to diminish the Regal Authority and Royal Prerogative Power and Government of the King in the Premisses and to infringe and elude the said Older and in Prosecution and Execution of the Conspiracy aforesaid they the said Bishops here again naming them with Force and Arms c. there and then falsly unlawfully maliciously seditiously and scandalously did frame compose and write c. a certain false feigned malicious pernicious and seditious Libel in Writing concerning the King his Declaration and Order aforesaid under pretence of a Petition then and there subscribed by them and in the presence of the King did publish wherein is contained Here the Bishops Petition was inserted Whereupon the Attorney General pray'd the Advice of the Court and due Process of Law to be made out against the aforesaid Bishops c. to answer to our Lord the King in and concerning the Premisses Then the Bishops Counsel moved for an Imparlance till the next Term and very learnedly and largely debated with the Kings Counsel concerning the course of the Court as to that Particular but were over-ruled in it Then the Arch-bishop in behalf of himself and his Brethren the other Defendants tender'd their Plea in writing which was read and its Receipt debated but because it was writ upon Paper and not upon Parchment and contained no more than what had been already debated and over-ruled the Court rejected it and put them therefore upon it to plead presently to the Information which they all did Not Guilty and this day fortnight appointed for their Trial at this Bar the Court taking the Bishops own Recognizance of the Arch-bishop in 200 l. and the rest in 100 l. apiece then and there to appear after which the Court arose ON Friday the 29th day of June being the Feast of St. Peter and St. Paul the Bishops then and there made their Appearance Sr. Robert Wright Ld. Ch. Justice Judges Mr. Justice Holloway Judges Mr. Justice Powel Judges Mr. Justice Allybone Judges These Peers being present viz. Ld. Marq. of Hallifax Ld. Marq. of Worcester Earl of Shrewsbury Earl of Kent Earl of Bedford Earl of Pembrook Earl of Dorset Earl of Bullingbrook Earl of Manchester Earl of Rivers Earl of Stamford Earl of Carnarvon Earl of Chesterfield Earl of Scarsdale Earl of Clarendon Earl of Danby Earl of Sussex Earl of Radnor Earl of Nottingham Earl of Abington Ld. Visc Fauconberge Ld. Newport Ld. Grey of Ruthyn Ld. Paget Ld. Chandoys Ld. Vaughan Carbery Ld. Lumley Ld. Carteret Ld. Ossulston 'T is possible more of the Peers might be present both days whose Names by reason of the Croud could not be taken The Bishops Names being called over the Jury was sworn whose Names follow viz. Sir Roger Langley Bar. Sir William Hill Kt. Roger Jennings Esq Thomas Harriot Esq Jeoffery Nightingale Esq William Withers Esq William Avery Esq Thomas Austin Esq Nicholas Grice Esq Michael Arnold Esq Thomas Done Esq Richard Shoreditch Esq To whom the Information against the Bishops was read And then Mr. Wright opened the charge to which Mr. Attorney General spoke shewing that the Bishops were prosecuted not as Bishops or for any point of Religion but as Subjects and for a Temporal Crime And that also they were prosecuted not for omitting any thing but for doing something even censuring of his Majesty and Government The Heinousness of which Crime he opened and laid down the Method they would proceed in to prove it And according to the Method observ'd in the Information that every thing might