Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	earl_n	howard_n	viscount_n	10,922	5	11.7783	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34574	Stafford's memoires, or, A brief and impartial account of the birth and quality, imprisonment, tryal, principles, declaration, comportment, devotion, last speech, and final end of William, late Lord Viscount Stafford, beheaded on Tower-hill Wednesday the 29. of Decemb. 1680 whereunto is annexed a short appendix concerning some passages in Stephen Colledges tryal / the whole now again set forth for a more ample illustration of that so wonderfully zealous pamphlet entituled The papists bloody aftergame, writ in answer to the said Memoirs, and published by Langley Curtis, 1682.	Corker, James Maurus, 1636-1715.; Curtis, Langley, fl. 1668-1725.	1682 (1682)	Wing C6306A; ESTC R40876	92,519	237

Stafford's Memoires OR A Brief and Impartial Account OF THE BIRTH and QUALITY Imprisonment Tryal Principles Declaration Comportment Devotion Last Speech and FINAL END OF WILLIAM LATE Lord Viscount STAFFORD Beheaded on Tower-hill Wednesday the 29. of Decemb. 1680. Whereunto is annexed a short APPENDIX concerning some Passages in STEPHEN COLLEDGES TRYAL The whole now again set forth for a more ample Illustration of that so wonderfuly Zealous Pamphlet Entituled The Papists Bloody After-Game writ in Answer to the said MEMOIRS And Published by Langley Curtis 1682. Contraria juxta se posita magis elucescunt London Printed in the Year 1682. THE PUBLISHER TO THE READER IT is the Common Fate of all Treatises writ in Matters of Contest by Opposite Parties That whilst the One is read without the other neither of both are rightly understood There came forth not long since in Answer to this Treatise call'd Stafford●s Memoires a Pamphlet Entituled The Papists Bloudy After-game Composed by a zealous Protestant-Dissenter and obtruded upon the Vulgar even to Nauseousness on every Bookseller's Stall This Pamphlet we confess hath had the misfortune to be generally reguarded no otherwise then as a meer Bundle of Hideously Rude and Scurrilous Barbarismes and Calumnies proceeding from the Malice and Fury of a Man baffled in Judgment and despairing of success from Sense and Reason Whilst on the other side the Memoires though they hardly appear'd in open view have yet gain'd the Reputation of Modest in expression Impartial in Matter Convincing in Proof and Innoffensive in Stile It is true these so differrent Characters seem to the Godly Party no wise applicable to the desert of either of the Authors The rather because the One of them though abounding alas in Passion and Cholor is yet to be Commended for his exceeding zeal against the Popish Plot And the Other by his reservedness in being exposed and shrewd Arguments made in defence of the Papists Innocence hath given no small umbrage of Suspicion he yeildeth not that Implicit Faith and deference to the Testimony of the Kings Witnesses as may clear him from the Imputation of Popishly affected Nevertheless so it is we know not how the Memoires are grateful and the Pamphlet odious to all indifferent Readers Nay some will needs say though we piously believe otherwise The framing of this Pamphlet was a meer Sham-Plot contriv'd by th' Jesuits on purpose to advance the Credit of the Memoires and Prejudice a good Cause by an Ill Vindication But 't is hoped there will shortly be Printed something by way of an Apology in behalf of the Pamphleteer In the mean while That the two Antagonists may stand in equal Balance and both be impartially submitted to each judicious Censure see the scope of our Present Design The Memoires are here made Publick The Pamphlet being already obvious to every Eye and Ear. THE Introduction IT is a wonder to see how Passion and Interest predominate over Reason in Mankind Nothing is done nothing said without some tincture of either or both Even common Occurrences are usually related as Men would have them to be rather then as they are Plain-dealing is almost fled And and all things now a days whether Private or Publick Sacred or Prophane are according to different Inclinations without regard to Truth promiscuously made the Subject of a Satyr or Panegirick An obvious example of this we have in the several Accounts given of the Tryal Declaration Demeanor and Death of the late Lord Stafford concerning whose Tragedy though acted for the most part in the face of the whole Nation yet there have flown about in a manner as many and those contradictory Stories as there are Relaters and such as know least commonly talk most to compleat the Error It is true the Printed Tryal set forth by Authority is no wise liable to these gross mistakes But it hath swelled in the Press by forms c. To so vast a volumn that few can spare either money to buy it or time to read it Besides it is in a manner silent of matters chiefly designed for the Subject of this Treatise viz. My Lords Comportment Declaration Devotion Last Speech and other Occurrences which happened inclusively from the time of his Tryal to his final End Having therefore attained to a most exact and certain knowledge of these particulars I shall for the satisfaction of the curious and manifestation of Truth give together with an abstract of the whole Tryal and some occurrences concerning it a plain and sincere relation of what I know and can by unquestionable Evidence justifie to be true And herein I shall also totally abstain from any the least moralizing upon transactions whereby to forestal the Readers Judgment But contenting my self with a plain and candid Relation of things as I find them leave every one to the freedom of his own censure and verdict upon them SECT I. My Lord's BIRTH Education QUALITY c. WIlliam Howard Viscount Stafford was second Son to Thomas Earl of Arundel and Uncle to the now Duke of Norfolk In his youth he was Educated with all Care and Industry imaginable to improve in him the Endowments of Nature and Grace And to speak truth he was ever held to be of a Generous Disposition very Charitable Devout addicted to Sobriety inoffensive in his words and a lover of Justice When he arrived to years of maturity he married Mary descended from the antient Dukes of Buckingham Grand-child to Edward and Sister and sole Heiress to Henry Lord Stafford To whose Title he succeeded being created by the late King Charles of Glorious Memory Baron Anno 1640. And soon after Viscount Stafford During the time of the late bloudy Rebellion he suffer'd much for his Loyalty to the King Always behaving himself with that courage and constancy as became a Nobleman a good Christian and a faithful Subject After His present Majesties joyful Restauration he lived in Peace Plenty and Happiness Being blessed with a most virtuous Lady to his Wife and many pious and dutiful Children In which state he remain'd till the 66. year of his age when happened this Revolution of his fortune as follows SECT II. My Lords Imprisonment Charge and Arraignment c. ABout Michaelmas Anno 1678. Mr. Titus Oates formerly a Minister of the Church of England accus'd upon Oath before the King and Council not long after also before the two Houses of Parliament several Roman Catholicks some Persons of Quality and amongst the rest the Lord Viscount Stafford of High Treason for intending and designing the Death of the King the introducing of Popery and subversion of the Government c. My Lord though he immediately heard of this Impeachment yet relying as he said on his own Innocence never left his Family nor withdrew himself from his ordinary known Acquaintance and Affairs till the 25 th of October 78. when by Warrant from the Lord Chief Justice he was sent Prisoner to the Kings Bench and from thence soon after

to be a Cheat and then in want thought him a tool fittest for his purpose the most easily prevailed upon and most proper to make a Knight of the Post So that the two last worthy Witnesses did by their Evidence rather confirm then lessen the belief of Dugdale's Tampering with Robinson herein UPon these several Evidences the Managers made these Observations First It was not likely that Dugdale a stranger to Robinson should attempt to Suborn him to Swear against a Person he knew not and in a matter whereof he was wholy Ignorant ●dly It doth not appear that Dugdale had any ill will to Moor that should induce him to Suborn Pol● to Swear against him Thirdly Both 〈◊〉 and ●ol● were Infamous men 〈◊〉 being a Common Cheat the other a Drunken Quarrelsom Fellow and seeming to favour the Plotters Fourthly Morral was but a Poor Barber of no Reputation and one who might easily be brought to say what he did To which the Papists answer To the first Robinson was no Stranger to Dugdale He was as the Earl of Macklesfield and Mr. Booth attested every where about Staffordshire remarkably known for Cheating a Dice Cock-fightings Races c. exercises also frequent with Dugdale himself Nor is it material that Robinson knew not my Lord Stafford nor any thing of him It was not Dugdale's business to find out a Man who to discharge a good Conscience would Swear what he knew But who to get Money would Swear what he knew not For which purpose Dugdale had good reason to think Robinson a very proper Instrument To the Second It is plain matter of Fact that Dugdale having accus'd and Imprison'd Moore for carrying away Evers but not able to prove it he would have hired Holt to make out his False Accusation To the third If Robinson and Holt were Cheats and Rogues my Lord well inferred they were the more likely to be chosen by Dugdale for such Imployments as he had for them Though for Holt the greatest offence laid to his Charge seems to be that he Quarrelled with Dugdale's Witnesses as thinking no honest man would take his part To the fourth Though Morral was Poor yet it doth not appear but that he was so honest as not to be Suborned to Perjury by Dugdale And therefore his clear and positive Evidence in this matter ought to stand good But let it be granted what the Managers contest for viz. That because Morral was poor Holt Quarrelsome and Robinson Infamous none of these three Witnesses ought to be believed What then will become of all the Kings Evidence as they term them What shall we believe or say of them Are they Persons of Repute Riches and Honour Are they not rather the Scum and Refuse of the Nation Why must credit be denyed to Beggers or Knaves when they accuse their Co-equals in probable matters without hopes of Gain And yet the same credit be allowed to the like Beggars and Knaves when they Swear against Persons of Honour Moral Impossibilities and Contradictions upon large hopes and promises of reward This the Papists take to be hard measure TO Counterpoise in some sort this charge of Subornation laid to Dugdale The Managers alledged the like proceedings on my Lords side To prove which Thomas Launder deposed That my Lord Aston●s Friends had Summoned him up to my Lord Aston's Tryal to give Evidence against Ansel and Dugdale and that he was to have an Horse to ride on and money in his Pocket Simon Wright Barber to Dugdale deposed That Mr. Plessington told him If he could find a way to take off Dugdale's Evidence or destroy him he should have seven hundred Pounds And that the said Plessington and others would have had him Swear point blank That Dugdale would have hir'd him to give Evidence against Mrs. Price and Mr. Tasborough My Lord at once to confound this Man by his own Testimony and further to detect the Subornation of Dugdale also in this matter produced a Letter or Paper Writ and Sign'd by Wright himself to Sir James Simmons In these words I can I bless God with a safe conscience declare upon Oath That Mr. Dugdale hath been unkind to me in taking his opportunity of my Poverty By reason of a private meeting of us two by his appointment He did at that time proffer If I would Swear against You and Mr. Gerrard he would Protect me as one of the Kings Evidence and I should not want money And in the Hall at Westminster he said If I did discover it that day at Mrs. Price's Tryal he would set me in the Pillory This I have own'd to his Face and shall not go back from this and more for fear nor favour So I rest as you shall find by your Servant Simon Wright This Letter Wright acknowledged to be his own Hand word for word But said Plessington and others had perswaded him to write it Thus the Man Swearing and Vnswearing contradictions against himself My Lord only reply'd See what you have under his own hand I have no more to say to him UPon this diversity of Evidence the Managers made this Observation That the Attempts made to Suborn Launder and Wright were manifest Signs my Lords Agents endeavoured by Sinister ways to Vindicate his Cause To which the Papists answer It is not conceivable how the Evidence given by Launder and Wright can draw the least suspicion of Subornation on my Lord or his Friends For the proposal made to Launder was by my Lord Aston's Friends and in behalf of my Lord Aston and not of my Lord Stafford Besides the words understood with that Candor and Sincerity they seem to have been spoken by my Lord Aston's Friends import no more then this That if Launder would like an Honest Man give true Testimony of what he knew against Ansel and Dugdale at my Lord Aston's intended Tryal at London his necessary Expences should be born and the convenience of an Horse provided for his Journey thither Where 's the Subornation here As for Wright indeed he is a person of that Matchless worth and hath given so clear proofs both of his own unshaken Integrity and Dugdale's Innocence that he hath highly deserved the Title Credit Dignity and other the Emoluments of an Associate to the Kings Evidence In fine he hath said so much both for himself and Dugdale the Papists know not what or how to say more THe last great Exception made by my Lord against Dugdale's Deposition was That Dugdale Swore in this very Tryal the Jesuits had Entrusted him with all their Letters that there came to his Hands whole Packets to and from several Persons in several places all containing most Damnable Treason many of which he said he opened Read and knew the Contents Yet though the preserving two or three nay even one single Letter under the Authors hand might have been so highly advantageous to the proving the Truth both of his own Evidence and the whole Plot in general Nevertheless he

way of Presents from some great Persons by taking of Jesuits and Printing of Narratives But did not all these Gains accrue unto him on the account of the Plot On what other score were these Presents made by Great Persons Had he any other Trade or Livelyhood then that of the Kings Evidence Is it not too manifest those Gifts were bestowed on him as a Reward of Past and Encouragement of Future Swearing Would to God such great Persons would duly consider the Dismal Consequences which necessarily follow such Rewards THe second Exception made by my Lord against Oates's Evidence was That the said Oates had Perjur'd himself in two Depositions directly contradictory to each other For proof of this my Lord appealed to divers of the Lords themselves who were present at both the said Depositions amongst whom the Earl of Berkley being required to speak what he knew Attested That my Lord Chancellour did ask Dr. Oates at the Bar of the House this Question viz. My Lords desire to know if you can accuse any other Person or Persons of what quality soever And you are encouraged by their Lordships to Accuse them Oates his answer was My Lords I have no more to Accuse in Relation to England Notwithstanding which Deposition he afterwards in another with unspeakable Insolence expresly Accused the Queen in a matter as he thought of no less then High Treason From hence my Lord concluded if the first Deposition was True Oates was Perjured in the Latter If the Latter was True he was Perjur'd in the First So that which of the two soever is True or False he is guilty of Perjury UPon this proof the Managers made these Observations First Doctor Oates having said much and having many things in his Head could peradventure not remember on a sudden this particular of the Queen Secondly The Evidence which Doctor Oates gave afterwards of the Queen was not positive nor of his own knowledge but words which he heard spoken in a Room in which he was not himself but coming in afterward he saw the Queen there Thirdly It might not be so clear to Dr. Oates whether the Queen was a Person capable of an Accusation so as to be Tryed for Treason To which the Papists answer To the first 'T is an evasion contradictory to common Sense that a Man whose Business and Study it was to Discover a Plot against the Life of the King and who by several long premeditated Depositions had as he said discharged himself of all he knew should notwithstanding all this while never remember the most Essential part viz The Inhumane Murder of the King Designed and Consented to by his own Royal Consort To the second Oates Deposed upon Oath he heard such words and circumstanced them with such particulars of Time and Place as plainly denote he intended a full and home Accusation against the Queen And granted his Evidence was not positive yet the matter was of such dangerous consequence as ought not to be concealed especially at a time when he was upon his Oath to speak all he knew and when he pretended by Discoveries to Save the Life of the King To the third Though Oates left to himself be very Stupid yet he could not be so Ignorant us not to know that a Queen designing to Murder the King her Husband is guilty of Treason And whether She was liable to a Tryal or no. Oates was guilty of Perjury In that being Commanded and Encouraged by the Lords to make an entire Discovery of all he knew against any Person of what Degree or Quality soever he expresly Swore He had no more to Accuse in England Indeed the Transcendent Lustre of the Queens Vertue Innocence and Endeared Affection to His Majesty leaves no place for Calumny to fix upon And the bare Charge of so soul a Crime upon so Renowned a Goodness is of it self Independent of other Contradictions a more then sufficient Conviction of Oates's Perjury THe third Exception made by my Lord against Oate's Evidence was That though Oates in his several Depositions particularly those taken before the Privy Councel and House of Lords did often affirm he had given an entire and Faithful account to the best of his rememberance Of all whatsoever he knew as to the matters and Persons concern'd in the Plot And though he had then also time and opportunity to reflect and deliberate upon what might any wise relate to my Lord Stafford in that affair yet he never accused him of any other thing then only That he had seen beyond the Seas some Letters Signed Stafford wherein the Writer had testifyed his Zeal for the Catholick Design But when afterwards consulting with himself and possibly with some others he found this slam of his would not amount to any thing material whereon to ground an Impeachment he Invented and Imposed upon my Lord a Commission of Pay-Master-General to the Army a device he never once thought on before From which proceeding my Lord argued If there were such a Commission receiv'd by my Lord at Fenwick's Chamber in such a manner as Oates relates this Commission being a matter of so grand Importance and the Delivery of it accompanied with so many remarkable circumstances in the very presence of Oates It is impossible that the said Oates who as he said on purpose for Discovery had taken Notes and Memorials even of Trivial Occurrences should forget and by consequence omit a thing of this high concern in his former Depositions But if there were no such Commission as most assuredly there was none then is Oates Perjur'd in his present Evidence And verily added my Lord if it be permitted to this man daily to frame New Accusations If easie credit be given to all his Fables and whatsoever he shall from time to time Invent may pass for good Evidence Who can be secure At this rate he may by degrees Impeach the whole Nation for Crimes which neither he nor any man else ever yet dream'd on UPon these Arguments and Inferences made by my Lord the Managers would not and the Papists say They need not make any Remarks THe fourth Exception made by my Lord against Oates his Evidence was That whereas Oates now declares He never was really a Roman Catholick but only Feigned himself to be so My Lord often and strongly insisted That a Protestant of the Church of England who convinced in his Judgment of the Truth of his Religion shall nevertheless on what pretence soever Provoke God belye his own Conscience and violate all Sacred things So as to make a solemn Abre●untiation of his Faith and Church to profess himself a Roman Catholick to live amongst them to practice Religious duties with them for three years together and this to such an height of Sacriledge as frequently to receive the Sacrament and perform daily external Worship to it which in the Judgment both of Protestants and Catholicks was to him so believing direct and gross Idolatry

saw Turbervil there And Turbervil himself acknowledged in Court He knew them not To qualify this Evidence Thomas Mort was called who deposed That he being at Paris and desirous to return into England Turbervil told him his Brother the Monk had introduced him into the Favour of a Lord by which means they might both of them have the convenience of passage in a Yacht which staid for my Lord at Diep That hereupon they went to Diep but finding no Yacht there Turbervil told him If they went to Calais they might go over with my Lord from thence in the Yacht At last they lighted on a Fisher-Boat at Diep and so came over in it But that this forementioned Lord was my Lord Stafford or that he ever saw Turbervil in my Lords Lodgings or Company at Paris or else-where he could not say UPon these Testimonies the Managers made this Observation viz. The Priests had such a transcendent Influence over my Lord as might gain admittance for any whom they pleased not only into my Lords House but also into my Lords Heart without the privity or knowledge of his Servants Now it plainly appears by the attestation of Mort that Turbervil through his Brothers the Monk's means was become my Lords Favourite To which the Papists answer It is not proved either that the Priests had such a transcendent Influence over my Lords House and Heart or that Turbervil through their means became a Favorite Mort indeed tells us Turbervil told him His Brother the Monk had Introduced him into the Favour of a Lord And this Favour only to come over with him in a Yacht For the Truth of which also he had only Turbervil's word and the thing it self never performed Must we from hence infer My Lord had given his Heart to the Priests and they had Introduced Turbervil into it A strange Inference But let it be granted my Lord had a real Friendship and Kindness for the Monks what then How is it proved they imployed their Interest with him in Trayterous Designs Why Turbervil Swears it Thus one Forgery is made use of to support another and nothing but proofless Fictions to make all out Yet to come more close to the present Evidence Had the Papists Introduced Turbervil into my Lords acquaintance and favour this could not be done Invisibly to the Servants some body must needs see and know when they came in and out My Lord was then in Lodgings and had none but two Servants about him Turbervil never pretends either the Priests or he made a secret of their visits Their accesses to my Lord he said were very frequent as the nature of the business and pretended intimacy with my Lord seem'd to require The condition of Turbervil was also such as might well render him desirous of the Servants acquaintance and Friendship especially being then as he said immediatly to go over in the Yacht with them and to continue employed in my Lords Designs and Service at London Now that a Man in these Circumstances should not know these Servants nor be known or so much as once seene by them is Morally Impossible THirdly Turbervil Swears That when he took leave of my Lord at Paris to come for England his Lordship was troubled with the Gout in his Foot Now my Lord protested in the presence of all that knew him he never had the Gout in all his life his Servants also who then lived with him viz. Mr. Furness and Mr. Leigh gave attestation They never knew him subject to that Infirmity only several years since he had been troubled with the Sciatica which my Lord confessed and the Earl of Stamford testified made him sometimes formerly though never at Paris walk with a Staff UPon these Testimonies the Managers made no Observations But the Papists Avouch here is also direct Perjury proved upon Turbervil by two credible Witnesses And though the subject of the Perjury seems not to be material to the main Accusation yet he that shall wilfully Perjure himself in any one Circumstance ought not to be credited in the whole Seing Nature it self abhors the Testimony of a Man who hath once Invoked Almighty God to bear Witness to a Lye FOurthly Turbervil Swears That after his refusing to be a Fryer he was discountenanced by the Lord Powis and others of his Friends and Relations so that he durst not appear amongst them Now my Lord proved by several Witnesses That after his return from the said Frjers he was civilly treated and charitably entertained by his said Friends and Relations To make this good John Minehead attested That Turbervil after his coming from Doway lay in the House of the Earl of Powis his former Master and was courteously entertained both by my Lord and the whole Family John Turbervil Brother to the Deponent attested He never knew that any of his Relations gave him an angry word but on the contrary when he went to Paris his Sister bestowed on him Seven Pounds to bear his Charges Upon which he said He would never trouble them more UPon these Testimonies the Managers made these Observations First Though Turbervil might per adventure as Minehead attests be civily treated by my Lord Powis in publick yet what Reproaches or unkind words might pass between my Lord and him in private Minehead might not hear Secondly It was no great Kindness in Turbervil 's Relations to give him Seven Pounds as his Brother attests never to see him more They rather purchased his absence then did him a Kindness by such a Favour To which the Papists answer To the first Groundless Surmises of private unkindnesses which none ever yet came to the knowledge of nor Turbervil himself so much as pretends is a strange way of clearing a Man in open Court from the guilt of Perjury to frame and fancy things that possibly might be and draw prejudicial Inferences from thence as if they actually had been is unjust proceeding To the second Turbervil as his Brother attests never had one angry word from his Relations and when his Sister gave him Seven Pounds it was not to purchase his absence nor did they turn him away But he himself ashamed it seems of his past misdemeanours and confounded at the goodness of his Friends Said He would never trouble them more FIfthly Turbervil in his Information given to the House of Commons Swore That he came to Live with the Lord Powis in the year 73. and came into England in the year 76. But the next day after he had given in his Information he altered the aforenamed Date and instead of 73. caused to be inserted 72. And instead of 76. caused to be inserted 75. which Alteration my Lord affirmed included Perjury UPon this proof the Managers made this Observation An honest man may mistake as to point of time in an Evidence given even upon Oath And to Rectifie such a mistake the very next day after it was committed denotes rather Tenderness of Conscience

then Perjury in Turbervil To which ihe Papists answer No honest man will positively Swear to what he knows not And it is argued Turbervil when he gave in his Information certainly knew whether the matters and circumstances he then Swore to were true or false or Dubious If the first he is Perjured in the Alteration If the second he is Perjured in the Information If the third he is not a person of Honesty and Credit who will positively Swear without Hesitation to a thing of which he is ignorant whether true or false And therefore the Alteration made upon second Thoughts cannot in such a case be justly imputed to Tenderness of Conscience but to some not before conceived Apprehensions of being taken Tardy in a Lye SIxthly Turbervil in the Information given to the said House of Commons and Exhibited in Court Peremptorily Swore That my Lord came over out of France in the Company of Count Gramount by the way of Calais In direct opposition to this Information my Lord proved that he neither came out of France in the Company of Count Gramount nor by the way of Calais But by the way of Diep a Month after Count Gramount was in England The Witnesses who gave Attestation of this were Mr. Wyborne who went over from England to Diep in the same Yacht which fetched my Lord And Mr. Furness and George Leigh my Lords Servants who came with my Lord in the said Yacht from Diep to England UPon these proofs of Perjury the Managers made this Observation When Mr Turbervil Deposed That My Lord came over by the way of Calais in Company of Count Gramount it could not be his Intention to say this as a matter of his own knowledge seing he himself in the same Affidavit tells us He came away before my Lord and had not his passage with him But the words Candidly taken are to be understood That he was informed my Lord came over by the way of Calais in the Company of Count Gramount Now that Mr. Turbervil was thus informed is evident as well by the Letter which he saith he received at Diep from my Lord as also by the aforementioned Attestation of Mort who saith that being at Diep Tubervil told him if they went to Calais they might go over with my Lord in the Yacht So that in the whole Mr. Turbervil may be said to have been peradventure something unwary in expressing himself but not Perjured in his Evidence To which the Papists answer To excuse a man from Perjury by pretending an occult meaning and intention in the Swearer not expressed in the words of his Oath is such an Evasion as if admitted would destroy the Integrity of an Oath and elude all proof of Perjury whatsoever Mr. Turbervil Swears in down-right Terms my Lord came over by the way of Calais in the Company of Count Gramount without any addition That he was informed so In which Oath he is directly Perjured for he Swears as an absolute Truth and without Restriction what of it self is an absolute Lye and what at best he could but Guess at by report and hear-say It is true indeed he contradicts himself in the sequel of his Information by saying He came away before my Lord and had not his passage with him but it is connatural to Perjury to include contradictions Wicked men are often blinded with Malice Passion or Interest And no wonder to find Incoherence of parts in a Story divested of Truth The only thing can be collected of Probability in this whole matter is That Turbervil being at Paris in an Indigent condition and desirous to return home got imperfect Intelligence that an English Lord whose name as yet he knew not and a French Count called Gramount had a Yacht waited for them at Diep And having also a Brother then in Paris he sought by his means to gain admittance for a Passage in the said Yacht This Design of his he imparts to Mort a Person in the same condition and who had the same purpose with himself Hereupon Mort and he goes to Diep in hopes to find the Yacht there but they fail'd of their expectation and Turbervil missing the Yacht would have perswaded Mort to go in the search of it to Calais Whilst they were in this debate they lighted on a Fisher-Boat and so came over in it into England Thus much may be conjectured from the Relation of Mort. But that Turbervil during his stay at Diep received a Letter from my Lord intimating his intention of coming for England by the way of Calais and that he should hasten to meet him at London is a most palpable Forgery For neither could Turbervil when required produce any such Letter nor did my Lord come over by the way of Calais as Turbervil would have us believe that Letter Imported And indeed who can imagine my Lord should send word to his new Consederate at Diep to hasten to meet him at London when he himself remained at Paris as hath been proved above a Month after and at length also came not to Calais but to Diep and from thence home So that ●here is nothing but contradictions in ●he whole course of Turbervil's Evidence SEventhly Turbervil in the last mentioned Information positively Swore That the Lord Castlemain was present at certain Traiterous Consults at Powis Castle several times within the years 72 or 73. Now my Lord proved that the said Earl of Castlemain was never at Powis Castle within the compass of that whole time This was demonstrated by the Attestation of Mr. Lidcot a Protestant and Fellow of Kings-Colledge in Cambridge who having lived with the Earl Nine years and particularly Accompanied him in all his Journeys and Residences during those two above-named years gave this distinct account out of his Book of Journals viz My Lord set forth from Liege to Paris January 1 st 72. Stilo novo where he remained three Weeks and from thence arrived at London January 24. Stil ' ver ' there he staid till May 73. from thence he went to Liege again in June and from Liege he set forth to London in August and returned back to Liege October the 3. Stilo novo 73 where he remained till January 74. c. Thus much to the charge of Perjury UPon this proof of Perjury the Managers made this Observation Mr. Lydcot the Fellow of Kings Colledge as he call'd himself was indeed so out in his Arithmetick so mistaken in the year And used the Roman stile or date so much more then the English That they suspected he was not so great a Protestant as he pretended to be To which the Papists answer That a Solid Witness ought not to be Ralyed out of his Evidence in a matter of Life and Death Mr. Lydcot however skilled in Arithmetick however great or little Protestant substantially proved the Earl of Castlemain never was at or near Powis-Castle from the first of January 72. till past Decemb. 73. The inclusive

Smith and Turbervil be real Papists how is it proved they were imployed to sham off the Plot Why may not Papists be good Witnesses against the Presbyterians in point of Treason without Suspition of a sham Is Treason a thing so strange and unheard of amongst the Presbyterians Or why should credit be given to the Witnesses when they swear against the Papists who are only charged with a Design to kill the King and credit be denyed to the same Witnesses when they swear against those who actually killed the King 2ly What the least Argument or Appearance is there that Dugdale Smith and Turbervil are Papists or ●opishly affected They profess the Protestant Religion they frequent the Protestant Church they receive the Protestant Communion they take all Oaths and Tests can be required of them as was acknowledged in this very Tryal They practise neither Fasting Pennance nor other works of Supererogation the Symptoms of Popery They pursue their former design of swearing against the Papists with as much obstinacy and violence as ever as was likewise prov'd in this Tryal And is it possible the Papists should employ in their shams and intrigues if they had any the very Persons who at the same time make it their Trade and Lively-hood to cut their Throats Indeed if any of the Witnesses against my Lord Stafford be Popishly affected it is Dr. Oates whose present disparagement of his fellow Evidence look● said Mr. Sollicitor General as if he were again returning to St. Omers Lastly It is argued The Jury bringing in Colledge Guilty of High Treason by that very Verdict cleared Dugdale Smith and Turbervil of the Perjury charged upon them by D. Oates It is answered 1 st The Jury brought in their Verdict against Colledge not upon the sole Testimony of Dugdale Smith and Turbervil but more especially upon the Evidence given by Sir William Jennings and Mr. Maisters Persons of known worth and honesty As also upon pregnant proof made and acknowledged in a manner by Colledge himself That he by Combination with others appeared in open Arms at an appointed time and place ready for and designing publick Acts of Hostility in the very presence of the King yet without his knowledge or authority which by the Law is adjudged Treason 2 ly The Papists do not undertake to make good Oate's Charge of Perjury against Dugdale Smith and Turbervil Nor theirs against him But only to shew that the guilt of this horrid crime lyeth amongst them And consequently whether it be charged upon Oates as the chief Swearing-Master and Original Author of the Plot or upon Dugdale Smith and Turbervil as his Pedants and Accessaries in the Imposture Or as is most rational upon both and all of them It follows That the Lord Stafford dyed by Perjury And Roman Catholicks have wrongfully suffered by their Villanies the loss of their Fortunes their Estates their Liberties their Lives Luke 29 Verse 22. Out of thine own Mouth will I Judge thee Thou Wicked Servant THus I have here Briefly and Impartially set down what occurs to me on this occasion And now for an Appology to the whole Treatise Seing the Papists as well as all other Men have a natural right when Impeached to defend their Innocence I hope it will not be Imputed a fault in me to have Rehearsed some of their Arguments as they lay within the Limits and Sphere of my Design If any Persons of Depraved Judgments shall from hence draw sinister Reflections upon the Justice of the Nation I declare they abuse both the Government Themselves and Me by such their unjust Paraphrase FINIS Tryal p 4. Pag 7. c. Pag. 17. c. The motives of his Perversion His Imployment in Eng. Pag. 21 c. His Contribution for Arms c. 500 l. Armies ready at an hours warning The Popes contribution 1000 l Pag. 25. c. Pag. 25. c. his feigned Conversion The Provincial of Castile contribution 10000 l. Afterwards a Promise of 30000 Masses Pag. 32. A Twenty pound Debt remitted for a reward to kill the King Pag 30. Pag. 17. ●e Papists 〈◊〉 against 〈◊〉 Plot in ●eral Page 123. (a) Colemans Tryal Coleman's Letters Sir Edmundbury Godfrey's Murder Page 20 Page 77. Page 136 Fire-Balls Sham-Plot c. The Votes of both Houses of Parliament declaring it a Plot. * See the Tryals of Wakeman Corker Marshal Earl of Castlemain Sir Tho. Gascoin Lady Powis Tempest c. Gunpowder Treason French Massacre c. Ireland's Tryal Page 40. c. The first onset against my Lord. My Lords Address Page ●5 c. Pa 24. c. Dugdal's Infamy and Beggery Pa. 94 c. Pa. 84. c. Pa. 87. c. Pag. 145. c. Pag. 163. Pag. 175. Pag. 147. Pag. 163. Pag. 168. Dugdale's Perjury Pag. 82. c. Pag 175. Pag 74. Page 147 Pag. 83 c. Pag. 80. c. Pag. 32. c. Page 174. Pag. 117. Page 175. Pag. 178. Dugdale's Subornation of Oaths Pa. 93. c. Pag. 138. c. Page 186. Dugdale's Improbable manner of Swearing Page ●2 Pa. 46. c. P. 728 c Pag. 130 c. This Oates affirms in Langhorns Tryal Page 101. Page 1●9 Oates's new Forgeries Pag. 102. Page 25. Pag. 126. Oates his Apostacy and Sacriledge Page 123. Turbervil's Perjury in seven Particulars Page 120. c. Pag. 122. Page 152. Page 109. Page 131. Page 108. Page 113. Page 181. Page 106. Page 180. Page 112 Page 110. Page 182. Page 101. Page 116. Turbervil's loose manner of Life Page 154. Page 163. The sum of my Lord's Plea as to matters of Fact Pag 167. c. P 199. c. The sum of the Evidence against my Lord. Page 17● Page 171 c. Page 184. Pag. 151. Answer to my Lord's Plea in matters of Law My Lord 's particular Address Page 198. Page 212. My Lord High Steward's Speech His Relations imputed to him as the Cause of his Guilt Page 214. The Sentence Page 54. Page 53. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. ●bid Ibid. An Objection Answer'd The intent of this Epistle Redemption in Christ a Eph. 2.8 1 Cor. 15.22 applicable by Faith b Mar. 16.16 Heb. 11.6 Which is but one c Eph. 4.4 c. d Jam. 2.10 Supernatural e 1 Cor. 1.20 Mat. 16.17 By the Divine Providence to be learnt f Isai 35.8 g Joh. 9.41 h Mat. 11.25 i John 15.22 Not from private Interpretation of Scripture k 2 Pet. 3 16. Pro. 14. 12. Mat. 22.29 l 1 Jo. 4.1 and 6. Prov. 12.16 m Mat. 18.17 Luk. 10.16 but from the Universal Church dilated continued and guided by the Holy Ghost for that end n Psal 2 8. Isa 2 2. c. 49.6 o Mat. 5.14 Isai 59.21 Joh. 16 13. Ezek. 37.26 Eph. 5.25 c. 1 Tim. 3 15. Mat. 16.18 p Mat. 28 20. Joh. 14 16. q Deut. 17 8. c. Mat. 23 2. This Church is the same with the Roman Catholick r Can. 6 8. Joh 10.16 Rom. 15 5. Joh. 17 22.