Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	george_n	sir_n	thomas_n	40,805	5	8.7899	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47868	The history of the Plot, or, A brief and historical account of the charge and defence of Edward Coleman, Esq., William Ireland, Thomas Pickering, John Grove : Robert Greene, Henry Berry	L'Estrange, Roger, Sir, 1616-1704.	1679 (1679)	Wing L1258; ESTC R21508	126,513	94

King and the Gun was found accordingly Upon some question of Particularities in the Evidence Mr. Bedlow was call'd up again to repeat his Testimonie about Sir George Wakeman which was to the effect as before of his being at Harcourt's Chamber Sir George's coming in and Mr. Harcourt's taking a Bill of Exchange out of his Cabinet and saying Sir George there 's a Bill for you which I have receiv'd at White-Hall to day by the Queen's order Sir George replying upon it that he thought his nine years Service of Her Majesty might pretend to deserve it and that there had been no hurt in 't if the Queen had given him it Mr. Chapman informed that one Mr. Thimbilby an Infirm person of 80 years of age brought him recommendations to the Bath from Sir George Wakeman This was the 17. of Iuly last His business was to get a Lodging as near the King and Queen's Bath as might be which was done And then he shew'd the Witness a Letter from Sir George whereof the lower part was a direction what to take and how to govern himself at the Bath which was now produced in Court That the Latin Bill the Witness kept to himself returning the English part of the Letter to Mr. Thimbilby Declaring that both he and his Son read the English part and that there was no mention of King or Queen in it more then of the King and Queen's Bath A Paper was then shew'd the Witness and a question upon it If it were Sir George's Hand the Witness saying that it was not having severall of his Bills to compare it by That he knew not of any date or name to it and that he did not know whose Hand it was It was then considered that the Witnesse's Paper could not be the Letter Dr. Oates reflected upon having neither Sir George's Hand nor his Name to 't as was presum'd of the Other Sir George Wakeman then deny'd the writing any other Letter then that of his Servant by his Dictate which Ashby carry'd to the Bath and saith that Dr. Oates had charg'd him before the Lords but with One Letter And then reasoning upon it that if he had been conscious of any Guilt he had time enough to make his Escape challenged any man to prove that he had any thing more to do with Ashby then as a Physician with his Patient and alledged that a Physician here in the Town would testifie that they two had been joyn'd in Consultations about him Sir George desiring the Iury to take notice that he never wrote any other Letter Mr. Chapman was ask'd if there was any thing of Milk mentioned in that Letter who said No and the Milk was never prescribed with the Waters Dr. Oates affirmed that the Letter he saw was in another Hand a kind of a Gentile Hand Sir George appealing to all the world that Milk was direct Poyson in the Case But Dr. Oates inform'd the Court that he was to take the Milk in Town Sir George Wakeman opposing that it could not be for he staid but two days after the writing of that Letter It came then to be consider'd that this could not be the same Letter Dr. Oates confirming it also and that the prescription of Milk was after the first line or two of Complement and that there was nothing of a Latin Recipe in it Sir George Wakeman observed to the Iury that admitting any other Letter then this in Court he must write two Receipts for the same thing which was very improbable And that the Reason of his Hand not being to it was his being ill and asleep when his man who wrote it over again from a foul Copy went away with it Mr. Chapman repeating the Order of the Prescription and declaring that he follow'd it at the Bath for six days together Dr. Oates deposed that there was no Bolus in the other Letter nor what Bath he should go to as was in This and that therefore it could not be the same Letter Besides that it was written above ten days before Mr. Asbby went away Sir George objecting that there was no need of telling him of his Course in the Bath so long before he went thither Sir George's Servant inform'd the Court that telling his Master that Mr. Ashby desir'd Directions for the Bath it being well late and his Master indisposed he bad the Witness take Pen and Ink and write and making some mistakes his Master bad him mend it and so he interlin'd the Corrections That this Witness wrote it fair that night and carry'd it next morning before his Master wak'd to Mr. Ashby who was then going for the Bath The Witness declaring that he knew nothing of Mr. Ashby's drinking of Milk onely that a Friend of his had advis'd him to it But Dr. Oates deposed that he himself was with him and that he drank it Night and Morning The Witnesses for the Prisoners were now call'd And first Elizabeth Heveningham who informed that she was by when Sir George's Servant wrote the Letter from his Master's mouth and that she saw the Letter and that there was no such thing in it as is said Wherein the Court was satisfy'd as to the Truth of the Evidence but that this could not be the same Letter Dr. Oates spoke of for That was written Ten days before Mr. Ashby went to the Bath Whereupon Mrs. Heveningham affirm'd that Mr. Ashby said in her hearing that he wanted Directions Sir George Wakeman pleaded that he was left at Liberty 24 days after he had been before the Councell and that upon Dr. Oates's bringing an Information upon the Letter now in question to the House of Commons Bar they sent an Address to the Lords with admiration that the present Prisoner was not confined and that thereupon Dr. Oates was sent for to the Lords Bar to repeat the Story and mentioning the Letter Now in debate he consest there that he did not know Sir George Wakeman's Hand and onely knew it to be His Letter by being subscribed G. Wakeman Sir George reasoning upon it that the Witness would have told more if he had known it at That Examination Dr. Oates depos'd that Sir G. W. was left at liberty because the Witness was so weak and distemper'd with watching and toiling about that he could not perfect his Charge and that he the Dr. did speak the whole Truth of his knowledge as far as he was able denying that he said he onely knew Sir George's Hand because George Wakeman was subscribed Which Sir G. W. opposed and offer'd to make good his Contradiction by the Record Dr. Oates deposed that he could not perfectly remember the very words but that if the Prisoner prov'd them by an Oath upon the Record it must be referr'd to the Iury. But to the best of his memory upon asking him about Sir George Wakeman's Hand he said that he saw a Letter subscribed with his Name and that upon This

Information Sir G. W. was committed Sir Philip Lloyd was called who informed the Court that Dr. Oates made Oath before the Council Sept. 3. that he had seen mention made of Sir George Wakeman's undertaking to poyson the King in a Letter as he remember'd from Mr. Whitebread to Mr. Fenwick at S. Omers and that Coleman had paid Sir George 5000 li. in part of 15000 li. which he was to have That Sir George Wakeman being call'd and advertis'd of this Charge he did not onely deny the whole matter and appear otherwise unconcerned but mov'd it as a reasonable thing that he might have Reparation for the Scandall This behaviour of his was ill taken and it was found reasonable to enquire farther into the matter but the Evidence coming onely from a Third-hand Letter Sir George was not committed Dr. Oates being call'd in again was demanded what he could say of his own personal knowledge concerning Sir George Wakeman Upon which question Dr. Oates holding up his hands No said he God forbid that I should say any thing against Sir George Wakeman for I know nothing more against him Sir Philip remitting himself to the whole Council for the Truth of what he deliver'd Sir George Wakeman minding the Jury that This was a Protestant Witness and Dr. Oates not remembring a word of the whole matter Dr. Oates did very candidly represent to the Court that he onely inform'd the Council as by Report of Sir George Wakeman's Receipt of the 5000 li. in part the Council not urging the Witness to speak upon his Knowledge That the Witness believed it to be so but would not be positive for in case he should have made such answer as is informed against him it was known to the whole board that he was at that time hardly Compos mentis and scarce in condition to return an answer But that this Witness did according to the best of his skill knowledge and remembrance acquaint the Board with Sir George Wakeman's Letter but he would not be positive Sir Philip Lloyd was then examined as to the Letter who informed that he remembred nothing of that Letter and that afterward this Witness observing in Dr. Oates's Depositions before the Lords and Commons an account of such a Letter from Sir George Wakeman to Mr. Ashby found upon the Table he this Witness hath often reflected since that time upon Dr. Oates's declaring at the Council that he had nothing more against Sir George Wakeman repeating Dr. Oates's Action and Expression that with his hands erected he said he knew no more against him Sir George Wakeman's Plea that the Council would certainly have committed him if this Evidence had been given to the Board appearing to have something of weight in it Dr. Oates sought to qualify that by saying that they were such a Council as would commit no body Which was reflected upon by the Court as unadvisedly said Mr. Lydcot was call'd who brought a Copy of the Lords Records and informed that it was a True Copy and that Titus Oates was set in several places as to an Information but whether it was his Hand or not Mr. Lydcot could not say onely that it was copied from Mr. Rolph's Hand To all which it was objected that the Witness not being present when Dr. Oates said this not the thing attested by the Clerk that made the Entry or saw him subscribe the Examination that Copy amounted to no more then a Transcript from the Iournall which could not be allowed in Evidence Mr. Rumly was offer'd to have his Witnesses heard but the Court finding that he had no need of them the Prisoner wav'd them Sir Thomas Doleman made Oath that Dr. Oates appearing before His Majesty and Councill on the Saturday and attending morning and afternoon and being employ'd that night upon Searches the Councill sitting Sunday afternoon as the Deponent remembred Dr. Oates was then examin'd and the Council sitting very long he was appointed that night to search again when he seiz'd several Priests and Papers the night being wet having much disorder'd him On Monday morning he was examin'd before the Council again and at night in so feeble a condition as ever the Witness saw any man Sir George Wakeman offer'd that he appear'd upon Sunday and so was dismist again till the King himself might have the hearing of the business the next day Sir Thomas Doleman than proceeded that Sir George Wakeman was then call'd in and deliver'd such an Answer that the Council very much wonder'd at the manner of it several persons being of opinion that his Denial was not so point-blank as it might have been insisting much upon his Loyalty to the Crown and Reparation upon a point of Honour Sir George Wakeman inform'd the Court that being charg'd with Treason before the Council and Dr. Oates his Accuser he pressed Dr. Oates to say if he either knew him or had seen him before He said No but that upon a Consult at S. Omers where Ashby was Rectour Sir George Wakeman was pitch'd upon by name for the poysoning of the King though the Dr. is now pleas'd to say that the Debate was in England That the Prisoner finding the Charge sos semote offer'd that where there was no Proof he hop'd there would not be expected any Defence The Prisoner upon this taking a freedom to instance in divers actions of Loyalty both from Himself Family and Relations as some Testimony of his Duty to the Government Mr. Corker offer'd in Plea that not knowing his Accusations he could not come provided with Evidences to support his Defence that nothing is easier then to accuse an Innocent person so that he shall never clear himself and that it is not a Positive but a Probable Oath that proves a man a Criminal and that otherwise Dr. Oates and his Companions might hang up whom they pleas'd let the men be never so Innocent or the matter charg'd never so ridiculous and that the Circumstances ought to be Credible as well as the Witnesses neither of which were as he suggested to be found in his Case Proceeding in a Reflection upon the Extent of the Charge it involving the whole Body of the Roman Catholicks in the Treason Using many Flourishes of Discourse to affect the Bench and the Iury as to the Credit of the very Plot it self Raising arguments from Improbabilities of Circumstances and Incredibility of Witnesses to uphold his pretence But the Court with as much Ease answer'd his Defence as they heard it with Patience Sir George Wakeman recommended one Observation to the Court That in Dr. Oates's copious Narrative there is not one Letter from abroad but he deposes positively both to the Date and to the Receipt of it and yet in the Case of a man's Life he will not be confin'd to a Month. Mr. Corker suggested divers Mistakes of Dr. Oates's as his charging the Prisoner with the denial of a Truth before a

Mr. Clay saw Dr. Oates twice in April May. Mr. Smith saw him the first Monday in May. Mr. Charles Howard saw him in Iuly but not in May. Mr. Langhornes Defence and Exception to Dr. Oates his Testimony And to Mr. Bedloes A Letter descanted upon The Prisoner found Guilty and Condemned Green Berry and Hill brought to their Trials Dr. Oates's Evidence And Law in securing the Depositions Sir Edmond-Bury Godfrey foresees his end Mr. Robinsons Evidence The Witnesses discourse with Sr. Edmond-Bury Godfrey about the Plot. Mr. Prance's Evidence Drawn in by Green Girald and Kelly Sir Edmond dogg'd into Red-Lion-fields They had sett him in St. Clements And prepare for the Murther A Quarrel pretended The manner of the Murther Green twisted his Neck and bragged of it The body carried off in a Sedan Hill meets them with a Horse and takes up the body Hill Kelly and Girald run his Sword through him Their Consultation at Bow A Drawer overheard the Conspirators at the Tavern Giralds Resolution to murther Sir Edmund Hill objected against Prances Testimony The reason of Prances flying off Mr. Bedlows Evidence He made an acquaintance with Sir Edmund Godfrey Le Faire appointed Mr. Bedlow to meet him Their Discourse Mr. Bedlow brought to the body Mr. Bedlow advised the sinking of the body in the Thames Le Faire charges him to help away with the body by the Sacrament he took on Thursday Mr. Bedlow troubled in Conscience The Providence of Mr. Bedlows discovering Prance The Constables Evidence about the body of Sir Edmund Godfrey Evidence upon the view of his body Eliz. Curtis swears that Green came to her Masters house And that on a Satcerday morning Hill was there A Note brought the Night before Stringer proved their meeting at the Plow Caries Evidence upon the meeting at the Queens Head The Drawers Evidence of that Tavern Sir Robert Southwets report of Prances Examination A Relation of all the Circumstances delivered by Prance and how the body was removed and disposed of Berries pretended Orders not to admit any body The Witnesses for the Prisoners Mary Tilden gave Evidence for Hills good behaviour Mrs. Broadstreet seconds the former Evidence Katharine Lees Evidence the servant of Mrs. Tilden Daniel Grey gives Evidence for his Brother Hill Robert How gives an account how Hill disposed of himself Mr. Cutler and Mr. Lasingby to the same efect Archibald seemed glad for Prances Discovery Greens Wise called her VVitnesses Mr. Warrier and his Wife gave Evidence where Mr. Green was Mr. Ravenscroft testifies his knowledg of Hill Corporal Collet and the Sentinels Examin'd about the Chair The Prisoners all found Guilty of Murther The Cause of Indictment Mr. Dugdale drawn into the Plot. The scope of Harcourts Letters Bold Letters sent by the Common Post. Several Designs upon the King The Letter about Sir Edm. Godfrey Mr. Dugdale gives 400 l. to pray for his Soul Corkers Objection against that Letter Mr. Dugdales Answer Corkers Objections to the story Why by the Common Post. The Black Cross upon Whitebreads Letter Fifty thousand Men to be arm'd Mr. Iennison's Evidence against Ireland Mr. Ireland positively Here Aug. 19. The King easily taken off Dr. Oates's Evidence against Sr. G. Wakeman Concerning the 15000 l. Sr. G. Wakemans Letter The Doctor charg'd with a Contradiction Doz'd with setting up Sir G. Wakeman not committed by the Council Dr. Oates against Corker Corker's Letter out of Germany Privy to the April Consult Mr. Marshal charged The Prisoners Defence Dr. Oates knowledge of Mr. Marshal Several Consults charg'd upon the Prisoner Questions to the Doctor about Pickering And the Consults Sr. G. Wakeman's Bill for 2000 l. Two thousand pounds for the present in part of more Letters and Discourses about the Plot. How Mr. Bedloe know Mr. Marshal Little against Rumly Questions about Sr. G. Wakemans Bill Sir G. Wakeman's Objection The Prisoner denies the Witnesse's knowledge of him The Witness affirms the contrary Sir W. Waller speaks to the point above Mr. Bedlow affirms that he knew Marshall Mr. Marshall denies it Mr. Bedlow comforts the Prisoner Their acquaintance at the Savoy The Prisoner positively denies it The Savoy search'd by Dr. Oates's and Mr. Bedlow's Directions Mr. Bedlow's Evidence against Sir G. W. repeated Sir G. Wakeman's Letter to Ashby Produced and Justify'd Dr. Oates insists upon another Letter Sir G. owning One and no more Sir George's Servant proves the Letter And Elizabeth Heveningham Sir G. Wakeman's Defence The Dr. excuses his Omission before the Councill Dr. Oates's Deposition against Sir G. W. before the Councill Sir George Wakeman's Reply Dr. Oates explains himself No mention of Sir George Wakeman's Letter before the Council Sir George Wakeman's Plea A Copy offer'd of the Lords Records Mr. Rumly clear'd Dr. Oates very ill and weary before the Council Sir George Wakeman's Plea before the Council Mr. Corker's Plea and Argument Sir George Wakeman's Observation upon the Doctour's Narrative Mr. Corker reflects upon Dr. Oates's Mistakes Mr. Corker denies all He says that Dr. Oates did not know him Mr. Marshal's Defence Sir William Waller speaks to the manner of Taking him Mr. Marshall defends himself Mr. Marshall appeals to Sir William Waller The Prisoner recommends himself to the Court and Iury. Witnesses for the Prisoners Corker not President as pretended Mr. Stapilton President of the Benedictines The Prisoners plead Innocence And brought in Not Guilty

not had one Letter but what I received this week which in part made recompence for the former for it brought me three of yours and one of Mr. Ireland's for which I render you many humble thanks and acknowledge the fifteen pounds from my Lord Castlemain though Mr. Ireland made no mention of it in his We are all here very glad of the promotion of Mr. Thomas Harcourt When I writ that the Patents were sent although I guess for whom they were yet I know not for certain because our Patrons do not use to discover things or resolutions till they know they have effect And therefore in these kind of matters I dare not be too hasty lest some will say A fool's Bolt is soon shot There arose a great difficulty upon the plurality of the word Patents Mr. Whitebread expounded it to be meant of his Patent for Provinciall which being but one would not have been called Patents Which Mr. Whitebread qualified by making it a Latinism and called it Literae patentes It was objected that he being made Provincial Ianuary 14. and this bearing date Feb. 5. the word Patents could not be intended of his Commission To which M. Whitebread answers that possibly they did not know till then and that it was not known what Exceptions might be exhibited against the person named besides that every Patent is called Literae patentes Dr. Oates affirmed that if a man be chosen to a place he must execute it upon pain of Damnation if he disobey his Superiour To which Mr. Whitebread replied that a hundred Instances might be given of Refusalls in the case and that he would have refused it himself if he had foreseen the Trouble of it appealing to Almighty God as he was to answer at the last day that he knew nothing at all of this business Dr. Oates declared that the Patents spoken of in this Letter were sent a great many of them in April and May before The Prisoners being now called to their Defence Dr. Oates's Witnesses were sent for to be in readiness Mr. Whitebread beginning that though he did not fear Death he would be loth to die by Injustice and that he hop'd that he should be allow'd the common freedome of endeavouring to preserve himself for that a man's Life might be taken away by Perjury as well as by a Pistoll so that he trusted that no man should be admitted as an Evidence against him that was not probus Testis offering that D. Oates was not such a man and he craved leave to say that he was Perjured He says that he did such and such things by Whitebread's appointment was present with him April 24. and that the Prisoner acquainted Dr. Oates with the whole design a thing so improbable that whoever believes it must take the Prisoner for a Mad-man to trust any body with such a concern at first sight for he confesseth that so it was and then to trust a man that had his Livelyhood from the Society for they maintain'd him that is to say first the Prisoner's Predecessor and then himself Upon his Importunity to be entertain'd in the Society the Prisoner perswaded him to withdraw reflecting upon him as a person not answerable to the purpose he pretended to and that for severall Reasons First for his Principles for he held severall Opinions that were not sound Secondly his Life was loose and therefore he was desired to retire To which end he had a suit of Cloaths given him a Periwigg and 4 li. in his Pocket which he promised to repay upon the fale of his Library in London but he never did The Prisoner took notice of the just Wonder of the Court at writing to Dugdale by the Post in so plain and dangerous terms and the like in his discourse to Dr. Oates but concluded in craving the Court's leave to produce Witnesses that from the 10. of Decem. to the 23. of Iune following Dr. Oates was at S. Omers and lodg'd but one night out of the house It was observed upon Mr. Whitebread as a strange thing that they should still maintain a man that they had so ill an opinion of but Mr. Whitebread denied the maintaining of him affirming that he was not sent over by them as he said he was and undertaking to prove it allowing all this while that they had maintained him before and distinguishing betwixt an office of Charity to a man of Letters and in necessity and a Confidence of Intrigueing with him in such a Case as this Mr. Fenwick then recommended it to the Court to consider that Dr. Oates's Evidence from one end to the other was supported by the sight of such and such Letters from one person or another and all the Testimony is the sight of the Letters as if Fenwick that knew Dr. Oates was turn'd away from S. Omers for his Misdemeanors should after that make him privy to all his Letters The Prisoner desired the Court to take notice that he had a thousand Letters taken from him and not one Syllable either of Treason or of solliciting people to come over was charged upon him out of those Letters Urging that all the proof made was but saying and swearing and defying any man to make out any probability to any unbyassed judgement how this could possibly be Here the Prisoners were minded that there is no other Evidence to be given then by saying and swearing Fenwick pursued his discourse declaring that he did no more think of his being taken or accused then of his death and that he removed nothing and that besides Letters there were seized in Bonds and Bills to the value of five or six thousand pounds and it seems strange that out of all this there should nothing of a design appear For God's sake said the Prisoner where are the Commissions sign'd and the moneys paid Mr. Hilsley being presented to the Court as a Witness on the behalf of the Prisoners Mr. Whitebread begs that their Witnesses might be sworn which though it would not be granted because it was against the King yet the Jury were directed to value the Testimony according to the credit of the Persons and the Matter in question Mr. Gavan offered that there was no positive Law and the Lord Coke in his Institutes says that there is not so much as Scintilla Iuris against it But this being against constant Usage and Custome it could not be granted Mr. Whitebread shews that in Mr. Ireland's Triall pag. 35 and 36 Dr. Oates declares that he came from S. Omers with Sir Iohn Warner Father Williams and Mr. Hilsley but it was answered that printed Trialls are no Evidence there may be Errata's in them Then Mr. Fenwick asked Dr. Oates if he did not acknowledge that he came over with Hilsley and Dr. Oates told him that to any question of that day if the Court thought it reasonable he would give an Answer Fenwick insisted upon it that Dr. Oates was forsworn