A TRUE ACCOUNT OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE House of LORDS From Jan. 7. 1691. to Feb. 17. following BETWEEN The Duke and Dutchess of Norfolk Upon the Duke's BILL ENTITULED An Act to Dissolve the Marriage c. OCCASIONED By Two Libellous PAMPHLETS lately Published and Dispersed under the same Pretence and Title LONDON Printed in the Year MDCXCII THE PREFACE THere have been lately printed and made publick Two scandalous Pamphlets the one under the Title of The Proceedings before the House of Lords between the Duke and Dutchess of Norfolk The other is called The farther Depositions and Proceeddings in the House of Lords in the Affair of the Duke and Dutchess of Norfolk with the Bill of Divorce Now these two Papers are so far from a faithful Narrative of the said Proceedings that what with confounding the Order of the Transaction and disguising the Truth of Things by industrious Omissions gross Imperfections and wilfal Mistakes This pretended Account has made it absolutely necessary even for the sake of common Justice to set the World right in the Story To which end the entire Series of this Affair is here set forth from Point to Point just as it passed before their Lordships and stands upon their Journal with such Notes upon the Evidence on both sides as the Nature of the Case requires and as the Reason of it will fairly bear The Reader will observe here upon this Relation that the two Principal Witnesses produced against the Dutchess of Norfolk are Rowland Owen and Margaret Ellwood for they swear positively to the stress of the Question whereas all the rest is but Circumstantial and made use of only for Aggravation Prejudice and Clamour So that upon invalidating their Testimony the main Cause falls effectually to the Ground saving only the unavoidable Misfortune of many an Innocent Person that suffers under the Impossibility of proving a Negative there being no Fence against uncharitable Presumptions Now taking this for granted as it is not to be denied the Reader is only desired to lay seriously to Heart the Impossibility of the Fact that is sworn against the Dutchess in some Cases and the utter impossibility of it to be true in others The Tampering and Practice that has been used the Inconsistency of the Witnesses with themselves their Character and Credit c. one of them Ann Burton being trapt in a false Oath out of her own Mouth upon the very place of Examination The Reader will also take notice that of Twenty Six Witnesses produced in Favour of the Duke one half of them are Principals and the other only Seconds Peter Scriber Andrew Anderson Robert Hemming John Reynolds and Margaret Foster are five of the former Number but speaking little or nothing to the Merits of the Question it was not thought worth the while to offer Exceptions to their Testimony though to the other Eight that is to say Owen Ellwood Hudson Burton Varelst Tho. Foster Lloyd and Wadsworth there were several Witnesses on the behalf of the Dutchess to invalidate their Credit viz. Two to the First Six to the Second Two to the Third Four to the Fourth One to the Fifth Two to the Sixth Two to the Seventh and Six to the Last It is very remarkable also after all these Exceptions to every one of the Duke 's principal Witnesses that the Testimony of the Dutchess's Witnesses passed current without any contradiction saving only that Henry Daggley and John Hoskins were examined against the Credit of John Hall in the Case of Jane Wadsworth leaving four Witnesses more in the same Case untouch'd and Edith Sawbridge against the Testimony of Mrs. Judith Stourton which Depositions the Reader will find to be of little or no moment as to the matter in hand This puts it past Dispute that they had nothing more to say against the Witnesses for the Dutchess but stopt at these three for want of farther Pretence The Result in short is this that all the material Witnesses to the Charge are Impeached and the Evidence on the other side stands untainted To say nothing of the unanswerable Reasons that prevailed with the Lords finally to reject the Bill especially considering the Solemnity of the Proceedings For the Cause was kept on from the 7th of January to the 17th of February following All the Lords in and about the Town being summon'd by an Order of the House bearing Date Die Veneris Feb. 12. 1691. to attend at Twelve of the Clock on the Tuesday following And the Officers that summoned them to give an Account of what Lords they summoned pursuant to which Order their Lordships met according to the Appointment and after some previous Debates Adjourned till the next Day when the Depositions on both sides were read at the Table by the Clerk as will be seen more at large upon the following Journal And after a long and solemn Debate The Question being put Whether the Bill entituled An Act to Dissolve the Marriage of Henry Duke of Norfolk Earl Marshal of England with the Lady Mary Mordant and to enable the said Duke to Marry again shall be read a second time It was Resolved in the Negative A True ACCOUNT of the Proceedings before the House of Lords from January the 7th 1691 to the 17th of February following between the Duke and Dutchess of Norfolk upon the Duke's Bill Entituled An Act to Dissolve the Marriage c. The 7th of January the said Bill was lodg'd in the House of Lords The 8th of January THE Dutchess of Norfolk having received Intimation that the Duke of Norfolk was this Day offering a Bill to the House of Lords for Dissolving the Marriage between them and that the same was under Debate before their Lordships She was advised to present the following Petition To the Right Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled The Humble Petition of Mary Dutchess of Norfolk Sheweth THat your Petitioner being informed that the Duke of Norfolk is at this time offering a Bill to your Lordships for Dissolving the Marriage between him and your Petitioner Your Petitioner Humbly prays she may be heard by Your Lordships before such Bill be received And Your Petitioner will ever pray c. M. Norfolk Upon which Petition their Lordships were pleased to make the following Order viz. Die Veneris 8 Januarii 1691. A Bill having been offered to this House on the behalf of the Duke of Norfolk to dissolve the Marriage between the said Duke and his Dutchess It was ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled that Her Grace shall have notice thereof and may be heard by her Counsel at the Bar of this House on Tuesday next at 12 of the Clock what she hath to object against the receiving the said Bill at which time the said Duke may also be heard by his Counsel for the said Bill if he shall think fit Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parlimentor ' Die Martis 12 Januarii 1691. AFter hearing Counsel this day at
a Civil Lawyer for her Grace the Dutchess of Norfolk who summed up the Evidence for their Graces severally It is Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled That on Tuesday next at Twelve of the Clock this House shall proceed in the debate of this Business and that then no other Business whatsoever shall intervene And that all the Lords in and about the Town shall be summoned then to attend and that the Officers that summon them give the House an account of what Lords they summon Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parliamentor ' The Matter was accordingly entered upon and after some previous Debates by their Lordships they were pleased to adjourn till the next Day when they proceeded viz. Die Mercurii 17 Februarii 1691. THe Deposition taken at several Times before on the behalf of his Grace the Duke of Norfolk as also those taken on the behalf of her Grace the Dutchess of Norfolk were read at the Table by the Clerk After long Debate thereon The Question was put Whether the Bill Entituled An Act of Dissolve the Marriage of Henry Duke of Norfolk Earl Marshal of England with the Lady Mary Mordant and to enable the said Duke to Marry again shall be Read a Second Time It was Resolved in the Negative Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parliamentor ' The Proceedings of the LORDS upon the Evidence Rowland Owen Examined on the behalf of the Duke of Norfolk against the Dutchess of Norfolk ROwland Owen saith that Mr. Reyner about Six Years since being the Duke of Norfolk's Butler ordered him to carry the things out the Lodgings being open he saw Mr. Germaine in Bed with the Dutchess of Norfolk the Dutchess leap'd out of the Bed and put on a Morning Gown and Germaine hid himself in Bed this was between five and six a Clock in the Evening about a Fortnight before Bartholomew Day he did not tell the Duke he is sure it was Germaine he saw him often twice or thrice a day the outward Door of the Lodgings was shut but he opened it with a Key he had Rowland Owen examined a second time saith he never had the Key of the Lodgings but once that Mr. Reyner gave him the Key when he went as he told him to the Blew Posts in the Hay-Market to bespeak the Dutchess's Supper he saith he saw not Frances Knight then in the Lodgings nor any other Woman but the Dutchess of Norfolk he saith he hath seen Reyner often open the outward Door of the Lordgings when he hath been by without calling Frances Knight he saith that he himself opened the first Door with the Key the second Door was not close shut and the third Door was open he saith two of the Doors are streight forward and the third turns a little on the right Hand he saith he was gone in at the third Door when the Dutchess leapt out of Bed Witnesses produced to the Credit of Rowland Owen EDward Silvester saith he hath known Rowland Owen three or four Years and he hath trusted him in Business and he hath ever been very faithful he hath trusted him in Stores to the King and he might have imbezell'd but ever found him honest and he hath had three or four Thousand Pounds worth of Goods that he might have imbezell'd and hath had opportunities of doing ill things but never did he hath trusted him with every thing he hath he hath had more than 20 l. imbezell'd by others but he never imbezell'd a half-penny He knows not well who recommended him to him he hath an hundred Men now and he knows not that three of them were recommended He hath trusted him with Goods an hundred and an hundred times that he might have imbezell'd and others that he hath so trusted have cozened him and he hath lost 20 l. in a Months time by them He works at our work and that better than twenty that he hath had and he 's no Porter he saith he knows not Mr. Negus nor was not acquainted with him till Yesterday John Jones saith he hath known Rowland Owen above three Years and that he 's a very honest Man and that he ever found him faithful that he lodged in his House and that he might have done him Injuries if he would and he hath been employed elsewhere and he never heard ill of him he believes he 's a Man of a better Principle than to take a false Oath Thomas Cooke saith that he hath known Rowland Owen five years and knows not but that he 's an honest Man and saith that he maintains his Family by his Labour he is his Neighbour and never heard him taxed with any Misdemeanor Witnesses Sworn on behalf of the Dutchess for invalidating the Testimony of Rowland Owen viz. FRances Knight saith she knows Rowland Owen as he was a Fellow-Servant in the Duke of Norfolk's House she hath known him a Year he was running Porter to carry up Coals and Wood he was not trusted with any Keys she was trusted with the Keys to the Lodgings and she always kept the Key to the outward Door to the Lodgings and there was no other Key and she never delivered it to any Body but sometimes left it with the Lady Peterborow's House-keeper she never let this Owen have that Key or any other Key to the Lodgings it was below her to do it he never went into the Inner Rooms no farther than the Steps to the Outward Room he 's a pittyful beggarly Fellow he laid the Steward's Cloath and had no other Livelyhood she lived with my Lady six Years and upwards and all the while had the Key to the outward Door she saith you must first come into the Room called the Footmens-waiting Room then into the Dining-Room then into the Bed-Chamber the Doors are sideways she made the Dutchess's Bed constantly she lock'd the Door and kept the Key in her Pocket she had the Key of the Rooms till the Countess of Westmorland had the Lodgings which was till the Duke and Dutchess left them which was ten or twelve days before Bartholomewtide six Years ago Henry Reyner saith that he knew Rowland Owen Street-Porter he saith that he this Witness could never get into the Lodgings but when he had the Key from Frances Knight he saith Owen never came into the Lodgings but had a Key to a House where the empty Bottles were which was without the Lodgings and he himself could not get into the Lodgings but by Frances Knight he never had the Key in his own Possession he never saw Owen farther than the Passage-Room he saith that the Doors are not opposite to one another he saith Frances Knight never gave him the Key he always found her there to open the Doors or in the Room he never had any Key that would open the Lodgings Owen never told him that he caught the Dutchess in the manner as is said he knows not of any Livelyhood he had besides laying the Steward's Cloath Owen had Wages from the Duke
the Bar what they could object for her Grace the Dutchess of Norfolk against the receiving of a Bill offered by his Grace the Duke of Norfolk to dissolve the Marriage between him and his Dutchess As also the Counsel of his Grace the Duke of Norfolk for receiving the said Bill And after Consideration of what was offered by Counsel on either side and a long Debate thereupon This Question was put Whether the Duke of Norfolk ' s Bill should be received It was Resolved in the Affirmative Which Bill is as followeth An Act to Dissolve the Marriage of Henry Duke of Norfolk Earl Marshal of England with the Lady Mary Mordant and to enable the said Duke to Marry again FOrasmuch as Henry Duke of Norfolk and Earl Marshal of England having been Married to the Lady Mary Mordant hath made full proof that his said Wife is guilty of and hath committed Adultery on her part And forasmuch as the said Henry Duke of Norfolk hath no Issue nor can have any probable expectation of Posterity to succeed him in his Honours Dignities and Estate unless the said Marriage be declared void by Authority of Parliament and the said Duke be enabled to Marry any other Woman The King and Queens Most Excellent Majesties upon the Humble Petition of the said Henry Duke of Norfolk having taken the Premises into their Royal Consideration for divers weighty Reasons are pleased that it be Enacted And be it Enacted by the King and Queens Most Excellent Majesties and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons in this present Parliament assembled and by the Authority of the same That the said Marriage between the said Henry Duke of Norfolk and the said Lady Mary his Wife shall from henceforth be null and void and is by Authority of this present Parliament Declared Adjudged and Enacted to be null and void to all Intents Constructions and Purposes whatsoever And that it shall and may be lawful to and for the said Henry Duke of Norfolk at any time or times hereafter to Contract Matrimony and to Marry as well in the Life-time of the said Lady Mary as if she were naturally dead with any other Woman or Women with whom he might lawfully marry in case the said Lady Mary was not living And that such Matrimony when had and celebrated shall be a good just and lawful Marriage and so shall be adjudged deemed and taken to all Intents Constructions and Purposes And that all and every Children and Child born in such Matrimony shall be deemed adjudged and taken to be born in lawful Wedlock and to be Legitimate and Inheritable and shall inherit the said Dukedome of Norfolk Office of Earl Marshal of England and all other Earldoms Dignities Baronies Honours and Titles of Honour Lands Tenements and other Hereditaments from and by their Fathers Mothers and other Ancestors in like manner and form as any other Child or Children born in lawful Matrimony shall or may inherit or be inheritable according to the Course of Inheritances used in this Realm And to have and enjoy all Priviledges Preheminencies Benefits Advantages Claims and Demands as any other Child or Children born in lawful Wedlock may have or claim by the Laws or Customs of this Kingdom And be it farther Enacted That the said Henry Duke of Norfolk shall be Intituled to be Tenant by Courtesy of the Lands and Inheritance of such Wife whom he shall hereafter marry And such Wife as he shall so marry shall be Intitled to a Dower of the Lands and Tenements of the said Henry Duke of Norfolk and of such Estate whereof she shall be Dowable as any other Husband or Wife may or might claim have or enjoy And the Child or Children born in such Marriage shall and may derive and make Title by Descent or otherwise to and from any their Ancestors as any other Child or Children may do any Law Statute Restraint Prohibition Ordinance Canon Constitution Prescription or Custom had made exercised or used to the contrary of the Premisses or any of them in any wise notwithstanding And be it further Enacted by the Authority aforesaid That the said Lady Mary shall be and is hereby barred and excluded of and from all Dower and Thirds and of and from all Right and Title of Dower and Thirds unto or out of any the Honours Mannors Lands or Hereditaments of the said Duke And that all Conveyances Jointures Settlements Limitations and Creations of Uses and Trusts of into or out of any Honours Mannors Lands or Hereditaments at any time heretofore made by the said Duke or any of his said Ancestors or Trustees unto or upon or for the use or benefit of the said Lady Mary or any the Issue of her Body or for raising discharging or counter-securing any the Mannors Lands or Hereditaments of the said Lady Mary or any of her Ancestors shall be from henceforth utterly void and of none effect And all and every the said Honours Mannors Lands or Hereditaments of the said Duke or any of his Ancestors or Trustees shall from henceforth remain and be to and for the use and benefit of the said Duke and such other Person or Persons and for such Estates and Interests and in such manner and form as if the said Lady Mary was now naturally dead without any Issue of her Body And also That all Limitations and Creations of any Use Estate Power or Trust made by any of the Ancestors of the said Lady Mary unto or for the use or benefit of the said Duke his Heirs or Assigns out of any the Mannors Lands or Hereditaments of any of the Ancestors of the said Lady Mary shall be from henceforth void and of none effect 13 Januarii 1691. THe Duke of Norfolk's Bill aforesaid having been yesterday received and read The Dutchess of Norfolk presented the following Petition to Their Lordships this Day To the Right Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled The Humble Petition of Mary Dutchess of Norfolk Sheweth THat your Petitioner being Married to the Duke of Norfolk 14 Years and upwards never had or received from her Husband any Intimation of a Misdemeanor on her part against him which joined to her Innocency of the Crime mentioned in the Bill makes this Proceeding before your Lordships very surprizing to her Her Person Estate and Honour which is more dear to her than her Life being now brought in question Your Petitioner humbly prays she may have a Copy of the particular Charge against her with the Names of the Witnesses and reasonable time allowed her to answer the same before any farther Proceedings upon the Bill Mary Norfolk Upon which Petition the following Order was made Die Mercurii 13 Januarii 1691. UPon reading the Petition of Mary Dutchess of Norfolk It is Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled That Sir Richard Reynes Sir Charles Hedges and Dr. Oxenden do attend this House to Morrow at ten
of the Clock in the Forenoon Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parliamentor ' 14 Januarii 1691. After having heard the Civil Lawyers the following Order was made Die Jovis 14 Januarii 1691. AFter hearing this day the Civil Lawyers pursuant to the Order Yesterday upon reading the Dutchess of Norfolk's Petition It is Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled That his Grace the Duke of Norfolk shall bring in the Charge against his Dutchess and particularly to the Person Time and Place by Saturday next at 12 of the Clock Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parliamentor ' 16 Januarii 1691. This Day the Duke of Norfolk brought in the following Charge against his Dutchess The Charge which Henry Duke of Norfolk Earl Marshal of England doth exhibit against his Wife Mary Dutchess of Norfolk before the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled pursuant to their Lordships Order of the 14th of January 1691 is for the Crime of Adultery THe Person charg'd to commit the said Crime with the said Dutchess is John Germaine of the Parish of St. Margaret's in the Liberty of Westminster The Times when the said Crime was committed were between the Months of June and December 1685 and several times since The Places where the said Crime was committed are at Whitehal Windsor and within the Parishes of St. Margaret's Westminster St. Martin's in the Fields St. James's St. Ann's within the Liberty of Westminster And in the Parish of Lambeth in the County of Surrey Norfolk and Marshal Upon which the following Order was made Die Sabbati 16 Januarii 1691. UPon reading this day the Charge which Henry Duke of Norfolk Earl Marshal of England hath exhibited against his Wife Mary Dutchess of Norfolk for the Crime of Adultery It is Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled That her Grace the Dutchess of Norfolk do attend this House on Monday next or some Person on her behalf then to receive a Copy of the Charge against her Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parliamentor ' 19 Januarii 1691. The Answer of Mary Dutchess of Norfolk to the Charge exhibited against her by the Duke of Norfolk before the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled THis Respondent is advised that the Charge exhibited by the Duke of Norfolk into this Honourable House against her as to Time and Place is too general and is not pursuant nor doth answer the end of your Lordships Order of the 14th Instant made upon the humble Petition of this Respondent Wherefore she doth humbly hope and pray your Lordships will not oblige her to make any further Answer till the Duke shall bring in a particular and certain Charge as to Time and Place against her And this Respondent doth the rather humbly insist That your Lordships would please to require the Duke to be particular and certain in these material Circumstances of his Charge against her for that it appears by his own shewing therein that the supposed Crimes objected to her and alledged to be committed were above 6 Years before the Bill was offered to this Honourable House during most of which time at the advice and by the approbation of the Duke was and continued beyond the Seas to ease him in his Charge and Part He frequently declaring that when he should be more easy in his Fortune they should live together M. Norfolk Upon which Answer the following Order was made And the Duke's Second Charge delivered in the same Day Die Martis 19 Januarii 1691. IT is Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled That her Grace the Dutchess of Norfolk shall have a Copy of the Duke's Charge delivered this day against her And that she or Sir Thomas Pinfold do attend this House to Morrow at 11 of the Clock in the Forenoon to answer to the said Charge Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parliamentor ' Which Copy is as followeth The Charge which Henry Duke of Norfolk Earl Marshal of England doth exhibit against his Wife Mary Dutchess of Norfolk before the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled pursuant to Their Lordships Order of the 14th of January 1691 is for the Crime of Adultery THe Person charged to commit the said Crime with the said Dutchess is one John Germaine of the Parish of St. Margaret's Westminster The Times and Places when the said Crime was committed were at Whitehall in the Months of June July August some or one of them in the Year 1685. At Windsor in the Months of July August or September some or one of them in the said Year 1685. In the Parish of St. Margaret's Westminster March April May June some or one of them in the Year of our Lord 1690. And in the said Parish of St. Margaret's Westminster in the Months of July or August 1690. In the Parish of Lambeth in the County of Surrey in the Months of May June July August some or one of them in the Year 1691. Norfolk and Marshal Upon which the next Day viz. the 20th of January 1691 the Dutchess of Norfolk presented the following Petition To the Right Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled The Humble Petition of Mary Dutchess of Norfolk Sheweth THat your Petitioner was served with an Order of this Honourable House late last Night to attend your Lordships this Day by Eleven of the Clock either in Person or by Sir Thomas Pinfold to answer to a new Charge brought in against her by her Husband the Duke of Norfolk Your Petitioner is advised That for her just Defence it is necessary to alledge in her Answer several special Matters relating both to the Duke and her self That in this short time appointed by Your Lordships your Petitioner finds it impossible to instruct Counsel to prepare such an Answer as she is advised is necessary to put in Wherefore Your Petitioner Humbly prays Your Lordships she may have convenient time to put in her Answer to the said Charge And Your Petitioner will ever pray c. M. Norfolk Upon which the following Order was made Die Mercurii 20 Januarii 1691. UPon reading the Petition of Mary Dutchess of Norfolk praying that She may have convenient time for answering to the Charge put in against her by his Grace the Duke of Norfolk Yesterday It is Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled That her Grace the Dutchess of Norfolk shall peremptorily answer by her Self or Proctor to the said Charge to Morrow at Eleven of the Clock in the Forenoon Matth. Johnson Cler ' Parliamentor ' Accordingly January the 21st The Dutchess of Norfolk delivered in the following Answer I Mary Dutchess of Norfolk under Protestation That the pretended Charge of Adultery given against me in the Honourable House of Peers was and is general insufficient and such as I humbly conceive I am not bound by Law to give answer unto Yet knowing my own Innocency and that I am not guilty of the pretended Crime this Protestation being Sacred to me
Mrs. Nelly Gwyn came in and asked her how she liked her Nights Rest And being asked for Germain she said she knew nothing of him My Lady complaining of her Hair being out of order Nelly answered it was a hot Night with her enough to put her Hair out of Powder and Curl too Quickly after Cornwall came in and asked for Germain and my Lady saying she knew nothing of him Nelly Gwyn said I question not but he will come out by and by like a drownded Rat with that while I was cleaning the Dining Room Mrs. Knifton called me and shewed me in a Closet Germain's Shirt and Wastcoat and afterwards makeing my Lady's Bed saw there were Two Prints where Two had laid The Shirt and Wastcoat were sent by the Duke to the Lord Petterborow's she saith she is a single Woman and was never Married this was about Bartholomewtide Six Years since she supposeth the Bed was Stained both by a Man and Woman Witnesses sworn on the behalf of the Dutchess for the invalidating the Testimony of Ann Burton ANN Burton against her self upon seeing several Witnesses come in to prove her to be a Married Woman tho' she had sworn the contrary was call'd to the Bar of the Lords and there saith she was not Married when she was at Windsor since that she hath been Married Ann Burton was her Maiden Name her Husband's Name is Benskin Susan Wheat-Croft saith that she knows Ann Burton and that she Lodged in her House Sixteen Weeks with her Husband Robert Benskin and she said she should have a parcel of Money to be a Witness for the Duke of Norfolk against his Dutchess this was about March Two Years since her Husband said he should have a Commission from the Duke of Norfolk and he should have a great deal more from him for his Wife is to be a material Witness against his Dutchess They did not pay her the Witness when they went away nor since they owed her Seven Pounds Fifteen Shillings she hath been seeking after them and could not find them she left a Trunk with Rags in it and went away Privately carrying away her Goods by Parcels Mary Sheriff saith that she lives next Door to Warwick-House in Holbourn and hath kept House there near seven Years and hath known Ann Burton two Years she lived with my Lord Clare while she was there a Soldier courted her they used to come every day for a Fortnight or three Weeks to her House to drink she ow'd her about 3 l. she hath told her several times since that she was to be a Witness for the Duke of Norfolk against his Dutchess and she was to have Money for speaking she heard Mrs. Tod bid her always keep in a Story and she would do well she the Witness heard them talk of 30 or 40 l. Mrs. Burton should get by being a Witness she is not paid the 3 l. nor knows not whether she shall be paid but last Winter she found her in Henrietta-street and she desired her the Witness not to take notice of her Name nor what she said to her for she the Witness should have her Money in a short time when the Tryal was over she told her the same a little before that when she lived at Major Wildman's she takes it to be in this Winter was Twelve-Month she thinks it was the Duke of Norfolk's Tryal she the Witness keeps a Coffee-House call'd Joe's Coffee-House William Purchase saith that he knows Ann Burton she declared to him about a Year and a half after the Dutchess was charged with lying with Mr. Germaine that she knew nothing of it and that the Dutchess was wrong'd as much as ever any Woman was and that she hoped to see those punished that were the Cause of the Accusation He saith he went to see her as a Fellow-Servant and he was not sent by any one and going to drink together they fell into this Discourse He hath talk'd of this Matter several Times particularly to Mr. Welborne since this Business was spoken of having heard she was to be a Witness against the Dutchess Observations upon the foregoing Evidence ANN Burton has the Story over again of the Shirt and Wastcoat and of Mrs. Gwyn's Discourse to which enough is said already and more needs not be said upon the Evidence of a Person so manifestly forsworn In her first Oath she swears her self a single Woman and that she was never Married but upon Witnesses appearing to prove the contrary she was called to the Bar again and own'd her self to be Married and that her Husband's Name was Benskin This Ann Burton had been a Lodger sixteen Weeks to Susan Wheatcroft as appears by Wheatcroft's Deposition she conveyed her Goods privately out of the House by Parcels and slipt away seven Pound fifteen Shillings in her Debt she told Wheatcroft that she was to be a Witness against the Dutchess and that she should have Money her Husband saying also that his Wife was to be a material Witness against the Dutchess and he himself should have a Commission and more than that too Mary Sheriff says that pressing Ann Burton for three Pound that she ow'd her her Answer was that she was to be a Witness for the Duke against the Dutchess and that in a short time she should have Money and then she would pay her William Purchase swears that about a Year and half after the Report concerning the Dutchess and Mr. Germaine Ann Burton told him the Dutchess was wrong'd and she hop'd to see her Accusers punished and that he himself hath often spoke of this Passage to several and particularly to Mr. Welborne Take notice that these Depositions for the Dutchess as well as the former have passed without any contradiction That Germaine's Man is neither produced nor named the Linnen if any brought as openly as it was sent for No Mrs. Knifton appears and the whole Deposition rests upon the Credit of a forsworn Woman Simon Varelst examined on the behalf of the Duke of Norfolk against the Dutchess SImon Varelst saith that he was at Windsor to draw the Dutchess of Norfolk's Picture about six Years since and had the Duke's Closet to put the Pictures in when he had done and had been at home two or three Days when Germaine came to him much concern'd and said you can do the Dutchess an extraordinary Kindness and will oblige the Lord and Lady Peterborow in the highest degree then he shewed me a Letter of the Dutchess to me and read it to me before that he told me there was a Shirt and Wastcoat and they are known to be his he said I desire you to save the Dutchess's Honour I desire that you will be so much a Gentleman as to own them to be yours and that you left them there I answered I was much concern'd there should be such a Trouble but I desired to be excused I could not do it without Prejudice He told me the Lord and Lady Peterborow had discoursed
no more Sin to Murther his Master than it was to kill a Louse he saith he hath lived with Mr. Germaine about a Year and half and that he never saw the Dutchess of Norfolk with him and that he hath ever since he came to him lived with him in the place where he now lives he saith he never saw Mr. Germaine with a Woman that was called the Lady Bateman nor knows any such Name or Person Observations upon the foregoing Evidence THere is not one word in Foster's Evidence true or false that 's worth the hearing only it is levelled upon the main at the Dutchess and Mr. Germaine and John Hall gives the Reason of it for this same Foster he says was Mr. Germaine's Coach-man who he said would turn him off and he would be reveng'd of him Hosea Grimsley Testifies also that some three days before Foster was turn'd away he said he thought it no more Sin to Kill his Master than to Kill a Louse So that the Evidence he gives was grounded on the Malice he bore his Master for turning him off Thomas Lloyd Examined on the behalf of the Duke of Norfolk against the Dutchess THomas Lloyd saith he knows one that went by the Name of the Lady Bateman at her House at Fox-Hall one Germaine a Wine-Merchant took the House she came thither about Midsummer 1689. She was off and on there till last Michaelmas He hath seen the Person that went by the Name of the Lady Bateman and it is the Dutchess of Norfolk Goodman was her chief Man and his real name is Keymer Her Brother as was pretended which he hath heard was Mr. Germaine was the chief Man that came there sometimes he came once or twice a Week sometimes oftner he 's certain as the Servants said it was Captain Germaine that came there every body said it was he He knows him not by his Name but by Hear-say if he could see him now he could tell whether it was he he hath not seen him since the Lady went away he believes Germaine was there every Month in both the last Summers he cannot say that Goodman was ever there when Germaine was there he saw him several times there in May June July and August 1691. Germaine's own Hair was then pretty long He cannot positively swear he was Captain Germaine he supposes if he saw him now he could know him Witnesses Sworn on behalf of the Dutchess of Norfolk for invalidating the Testimony of Thomas Lloyd Alexander Herman saith that he served Mr. Germaine he hath left his Service a Year and a half about eight Weeks after he came from Ireland with the King he served him a Year and half Mr. Germaine was in Ireland with the King in the Summer in the Year 1690. He went to Ireland two Days before the King that Summer he continued there four Months he believes he went the last of May or the first of June he came back with the King He the Witness served him all that while in Ireland and saw him every Hour and every Day and never stirr'd from him he came from Ireland in the same Ship with the Lord Villers the Earl of Manchester and Mr. Felton and he went to Ireland in the Monmouth Yatch with the Envoys of Holland and Brandenburgh and the Marquess Mompavillon He saith Mr. Germaine was at Brussels in May last he saw him there and spoke with him there he saw the Lord Villers and the Lord Lumley there with him he lodg'd in the same Tavern there with him for four Days and saw him not after He the Witness coming then for England left him there He never knew him wear his own Hair his own Hair is dark brown He never knew him appear abroad without a Wigg his Hair is about half a Finger long he wore a fair Perriwigg He saith he the Witness was quarter'd in a little Tent behind him in Ireland he could not stir but he heard him h'e saith that four Weeks after he saw him in Brussels he saw him walking in St. James's Park Anthony Morée saith he was Barber to Mr. Germaine the first time he shaved him was about five or six Years since his own Hair is brown he shaved his Head very often he shaved him before he went to Holland and since he came home he never saw his Hair long enough to cover his Ears nor saw he him ever wear his own Hair but a Periwigg He shaved him for a Year and half before and since he went for Ireland He shaved him always at his own House near the Park He or his Man shaved him ever since he came from Holland to this Day He or his Man shaved him the Night before the King went for Holland He saith that Mr. Germaine when he went away said it would be a Month or two before he should come back but he knows not how long it was This was at his House next door to the Cock-pit he shaved him generally since the King came into England He saith the Campaign was almost done when he first shaved him after he came from Flanders Observations upon the foregoing Evidence LLoyd's Deposition is nothing at all to the purpose or if it were never so pertinent the Falsities in it are sufficient to spoil it for in Truth his Evidence as to Mr. Germaine's being at Fox-Hall is only grounded upon Hear-say and Report And yet he ventures to swear him to be there every Month in both the last Summers and particularly that he was several times there in May June July and August 1691. Whereas Alexander Herman swears that Mr. Germaine went to Ireland in the Summer 1690 on the last of May or the first of June where he stay'd about four Months and that himself saw and serv'd him there and says farther that he was at Brussels in May last Anthony Morée says also being Barber to Mr. Germaine that he went beyond Seas and the Campaign was almost over when he first shaved him after he came back from Flanders which is a flat Contradiction to Lloyd's Evidence The next Witnesses produced by the Duke of Norfolk were Peter Scriber Andrew Anderson Robert Hemming John Reynolds and Margaret Foster PEter Scriber saith that he let an House at Fox-Hall to Mr. Daniel Germaine Mid-Summer was two Years viz. 1689 at Twenty four Pound per Annum He told him that two Ladies that were to come from Holland were to live there one was Mrs. Bryan the other the Lady Bateman they went by the Name of Daniel Germaine's and Captain Germaine's Sisters The Ladies came to the House about ten Days after it was Let one Goodman that attended them was off and on there all the Time that the Lady Bateman lived there which was off and on till September last This Goodman is the same Man that was heard here the other day as Henry Keymer he remembers not nor can be positive that he hath seen Captain Germaine there at any time he cannot say he knows him he hath not