I Do appoint Richard Sare to Print the two Tryals of Titus Otes for Perjury: And Order, That no other Perſon do preſume to Print the ſame.
THE TRYALS, Convictions & Sentence OF TITUS OTES, UPON TWO INDICTMENTS For Willful, Malicious, and Corrupt PERJURY: AT THE KINGS-BENCH-BARR at Weſtminſter, Before the Right Honourable George Lord Jeffreys, Baron of Wem, Lord Chief Juſtice of His Majeſties Court of Kings-Bench, and the reſt of the Judges of that Court.
Upon Friday the 8th. and Saturday the 9th. days of May, Anno Domini, 1685.
And in the Firſt Year of the Reign of our Soveraign Lord King JAMES the II. &c.
LONDON, Printed for R. Sare at Grays-Inn-Gate in Holborn, and are to be ſold by Randal Taylor, 1685.
THis day being apointed for the Tryal of one of the Cauſes between our Soveraign Lord the King, and Titus Oates for Perjury; the ſame began between eight and nine in the Morning, and proceeded in the manner following.
Firſt Proclamation was made for Silence, then the Defendant was called, who appeared in Perſon, being brought up by Rule from the King's Bench Priſon, where we was in Cuſtody, and was adviſed to look to his Challenges to the Jury that were Impanel'd to try the Cauſe.
My Lord, I am to manage my own Defence, and have a great many Papers and things which I have brought in order to it, I pray I may have ſome Conveniency for the Managing my own Tryal.
Ay, Ay, let him ſit down there, within the Bar, and let him have Conveniency for his Papers.
Cryer, ſwear Sir William Dodſon.
My Lord, I except againſt Sir William Dodſon.
What is the Cauſe of Exception, Mr. Oats?
Why do you challenge him?
My Lord, I humbly conceive in theſe caſes of Criminal Matters, the Defendant has Liberty of excepting againſt any of the Jurors, without ſhewing Cauſe, provided there be a full Jury beſides.
No, no, that is not ſo, you are miſtaken in that Mr. Oates.
My Lord, I am adviſed ſo, I do not underſtand the Law my ſelf.
But we tell you then, it cannot be allow'd; if Mr. Attorney will conſent to wave him, well and good.
No, my Lord, I know no reaſon for it, I cannot conſent to any ſuch thing.
Then, if you will not have him ſworn, you muſt ſhew your Cauſe preſently.
My Lord, I cannot aſſign any Cauſe.
Then he muſt be ſworn.
Swear him.
Sir William Dodſon take the Book, you ſhall well and truly try this Iſſue between our Soveraign Lord the King, and Titus Oates, and a true Verdict give according to the Evidence; ſo help you God.
Swear Sir Edmund Wiſeman,
Benjamin Scutt.
My Lord, I challenge him.
For what Cauſe.
My Lord, he was one of the Grand Jury that found the Bill.
Was he ſo, that is an exception indeed; what ſay you Mr. Attorney.
My Lord, I believe he was upon one of the Indictments, but I think, it was not this.
But if he were in either of them, he cannot be ſo impartial.
My Lord, we will not ſtand upon it, we'll wave him.
Thomas Fowlis.
Pray let me ſee that Gentleman
Are you not a Goldſmith in Fleetſtreet, between the two Temples?
Yes, I am.
Very well, Sir I do not except againſt you, only I deſire to know, whether it were you or not.
Swear him,
Edward Kempe, ſworn.
My Lord, I challenge him.
You ſpeak too late, he is ſworn already.
My Lord, they are ſo quick, I could not ſpeak, but he was one of the Grand Jury too.
We cannot help it now.
I did know that he was ſo, but to ſhew that we mean nothing but fair, we are content to wave him.
You do very well Mr. Attorney General; let him be withdrawn.
Mr. Kempe, you may take your caſe; ſwear Ambroſe Iſted,
Henry Collier, Sworn.
Richard Howard, Sworn.
Cryer, count theſe.
One, &c. Sir William Dodſon.
Richard Howard.
Twelve good men and true, hearken to the Record, and ſtand together, and hear the Evidence.
The Names of the Twelve, ſworn, were theſe.
Before the Councel opens the Cauſe, I deſire to move one thing to your Lordſhip
What is it you would have?
My Lord, I have three Witneſſes that are very material one's to my Defence, who are now Priſoners in the King's Bench, for whom I moved yeſterday, that I might have a Rule of Court to bring them up to day, but it was objected, that they were in Execution, and ſo not to be brought; I humbly move your Lordſhip now, that I may have a Habeas Corpus for them, to bring them immediately hither.
We cannot do it.
Pray, Good my Lord, they are very material Witneſſes for me, and I mov'd yeſterday for them.
You did ſo, but we told your Councel then, and ſo we tell you now, we cannot do it by Law, it will be an eſcape.
My Lord, I ſhall want their Teſtimony.
Truely we cannot help it, the Law will not allow it, and you muſt be ſatisfied.
Gentlemen, you that are ſworn of this Jury, hearken to the Record, by Virtue of an Inquiſition taken at Juſtice Hall in the Old Bayly, in the Pariſh of St. Sepulcher, in the Ward of Faringdon without, London, upon Wedneſday the 10th. of December, in the 36th. of the Raign of our late Soveraign Lord Charles the II. by the grace of God, of England, Scotland, France and Ireland King, Defender of the Faith, &c. Before Sir James Smith Knight, Mayor of the City of London; Sir George Jefferies Knight and Baronet, Lord Chief Juſtice of this Honourable Court; Sir Thomas Jones Knight, Lord Chief Juſtice of the Court of Common Pleas; William Montague Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer; Sir James Edwards Knight; Sir John More Knight, Aldermen of the ſaid City; Sir Thomas Jenner Knight, one of his Majeſties Sergeants at Law, and Recorder of the ſame City, and others, their Companions, Juſtices of Oyer and Terminer, by the Oaths of twelve Jurors, Honeſt and Lawful Men of the City of London aforeſaid, who then and there being ſworn and charged to enquire for our ſaid3 Lord the King, and the Body of the City aforeſaid, upon their Oaths preſent, that at the Seſſion of our Soveraign Lord the King, holden for the County of Middleſex, at Hick's Hall, in St. John's Street, in the County aforeſaid, on Monday, to wit, 16 Deaem. in the year of the Raign of our late Soveraign Lord, Charles the Second, of England, Scotland, France and Ireland King, Defender of the Faith, &c. the thirtieth before Sir Reginald Forſter Baronet, Sir Philip Matthews Baronet, Sir William Bowls Knight, Sir Charles Pitfield Knight, Thomas Robinſon, Humphrey Wyrley, Thomas Hariott, and William Hempſon Eſquires, Juſtices of the ſaid Soveraign Lord the King, to enquire by the Oath of Honeſt and Lawful Men of the County of Middleſex aforeſaid, and by other Ways, manners, means, by which they might better know, as well within Liberties as without, by whom the Truth of the matter may be better known and enquired, of whatſoever Treaſons, Miſpriſions of Treaſons, Inſurrections, Rebellions, Counterfeitings, Clippings, waſhings and falſe makings of the Money of this Kingdom of England, and of other Kingdoms and Dominions whatſoever; and of whatſoever Murders, Felonies, Man-ſlaughters, Killings, Burglaries, and other Articles and Offences in the Letters Pattents of our ſaid Soveraign Lord the King, to them, or any four, or more of them therefore directed, ſpecified, as alſo the Acceſſaries of the ſame within the County aforeſaid, as well within Liberties as without, by whomſoever, howſoever had, made, done or committed; and the ſaid Treaſons, and other the Premiſes to hear and determine, according to the Law and Cuſtom of this Kingdom of England, being aſſigned by the Oath of Ralph Wain, John Vaughan, Richard Foſter, Thomas Paget, Robert Newington, Henry Tompkins, Robert Hays, John Greenwood, Peter Stimpſon, Joſias Croſley, Richard Richman, Auguſtine Bear, John King, Nathaniel Brett, Francis Fiſher, and Samuel Linn, Honeſt and Lawful Men of the County aforeſaid, ſworn, and charged to enquire for our ſaid Soveraign Lord the King, and the Body of the County aforeſaid, upon their Oaths. It was preſented, that Thomas White, otherwiſe Whitebread, late of the Pariſh of St. Giles in the Fields, in the County of Middleſex Clerk, William Ireland late of the Pariſh aforeſaid, in the County aforeſaid Clerk, John Fenwick, late of the Pariſh aforeſaid, in the County aforeſaid, Clerk, Thomas Pickering of the Pariſh aforeſaid, in the County aforeſaid, Clerk, John Grove of the Pariſh aforeſaid, in the County aforeſaid, Gent. as falſe Traitors againſt the moſt Illuſtrious, Serene, and moſt excellent Prince, our ſaid late Soveraign Lord Charles the Second, by the Grace of God, of England, Scotland, France and Ireland King, Defender of the Faith, &c. Their Supreme and Natural Lord, not having the Fear of God in their Hearts, nor weighing the Duty of their Allegiance, but being moved and ſeduced by the Inſtigation of the Devil: The Cordial Love, and True and Natural Obedience, which faithful Subjects of our ſaid Soveraign Lord the King towards him, ſhould, and of right ought to bear, utterly withdrawing, and contriving, and with all their Might intending the Peace and Tranquility of this Kingdom of England to diſturb, and the true Worſhip of God within this Kingdom of England uſed, and by Law eſtabliſhed, to ſubvert, and Rebellion within this Kingdom of England to move, ſtir up, and procure, and the Cordial Love, and true and due Obedience, which Faithful Subjects of our ſaid Lord the King, towards him, the ſaid Soveraign Lord the King, ſhould, and of right ought to bear, utterly to withdraw, put out, and extinguiſh, and our ſaid Soveraign Lord the King, to Death and final Deſtruction to bring and put, the four and twentieth day of April, in the year of the Reign of our late Soveraign Lord Charles the Second, by the Grace of God, of England, Scotland, France and Ireland King, Defender of the Faith, &c. the thirtieth, at the Pariſh of St. Giles in the Fields, in the County aforeſaid, falſly, maliciouſly, ſubtilely, adviſedly, and trayterouſly did purpoſe, compaſs, Imagine and Intend, Sedition and Rebellion within this Kingdom of England to move, ſtir up and procure, and a miſerable Slaughter among the Subjects of our ſaid Lord the King to procure and cauſe, and our ſaid late Lord the King from the Regal State, Title, Power and Government of his Kingdom of Enggland utterly to deprive, depoſe, caſt down, and diſ-inherit, and him our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King to Death, and final Deſtruction to bring and put, and the Government of the ſaid Kingdom, and the ſincere Religion of God, rightly by the Laws of the ſaid Kingdom eſtabliſhed, at their Will and Pleaſure to change and alter, and the State of this whole Kingom of England, throughout all its parts, well inſtituted and ordain'd, wholly to ſubvert and deſtroy, and war againſt our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King, within this Kingdom of England to levy, and thoſe their moſt wicked Treaſons, and Traiterous Imaginations and Purpoſes aforeſaid to fullfil and perfect,4 They the aforeſaid Thomas White, alias Whitebread, William Ireland, John Fenwick, Thomas Pickering, and John Grove, other falſe Traytors to the Jurors not known, the ſaid four and twentieth day of April, in the year of the Reign of our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King, the Thirtieth, with Force and Arms &c. at the Pariſh of St. Giles in the Fields, in the County of Middleſex aforeſaid, falſly, maliciouſly, ſubtilely, adviſedly, Deviliſhly, and Traiterouſly did aſſemble themſelves, unite and meet together, and then and there falſly, maliciouſly, ſubtilely, adviſedly, deviliſhly, and Trayterouſly, did conſult and agree our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King to Death, and final Deſtruction to bring and put, and the Religion within this Kingdom of England, rightly, and by the Laws of the ſame Kingdom eſtabliſhed, to the Superſtition of the Romiſh Church, to change and alter, and the ſooner to fulfil and perfect their ſaid moſt wicked Treaſons, and Traiterous Imaginations, and purpoſes, they, the ſaid Thomas White, alias Whitebread, William Ireland, John Fenwick, Thomas Pickering: and John Grove, and other falſe Traytors of our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King, to the Jurors unknown, afterwards, to wit, the ſame 24th, day of April, in the ſaid 30th. year of our ſaid late Soverain Lord the King, at the ſaid aforeſaid Pariſh of St. Giles in the Fields, in the County aforeſaid, falſly, ſubtilely, adviſedly, deviliſhly, and Trayterouſly among themſelves, did conclude and agree, that they the aforeſaid Thomas Pickering, John Grove, him, the ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King ſhould kill and murder, and that they the ſaid Thomas White, alias Whitebread, William Ireland, John Fenwick and other falſe Traytors to the Jurors unknown: A certain number of Maſſes between them, then and there, agreed for the Health of the Soul of him the ſaid Thomas Pickering, therefore ſhould ſay, Celebrate and perform, and therefore ſhould pay unto the ſaid John Grove a certain Sum of Money between them, then and there agreed; and the Jurors aforeſaid, upon their Oath aforeſaid, did further preſent, that the ſaid Thomas Pickering and John Grove, upon the agreement aforeſaid, then and there, falſly, ſubtilely, adviſedly, Maliciouſly, deviliſhy and Trayterouſly did take upon them, and did promiſe to the ſaid Thomas White, alias Whitebread, William Ireland, John Fenwick, and other falſe Traytors of our late ſaid Soveraign Lord the King to the Jurors aforeſaid unknown, then and there, falſly, ſubtilely, adviſedly, maliciouſly, deviliſhy and Trayterouſly, did promiſe that they the ſaid Thomas Pickering and John Grove would kill and murder our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King, and they, the ſaid Thomas White, alias Whitebread, William, Ireland, John Fenwick, Thomas Pickering, John Grove, and other falſe Traytors of ourſaid late Soveraign Lord the King afterwards, to wit, the ſaid four and twentieth day of April; in the thirtieth year aforeſaid, at the ſaid aforeſaid Pariſh of St. Giles in the Fields, in the County of Middleſex aforeſaid, ſubtilely, adviſedly, maliciouſly, deviliſhly, and Trayterouſly, did ſeverally every one of them give their Faith each to the other, and upon the Sacrament then and there trayterouſly did ſwear and promiſe, to conceal, and not to divulge their ſaid moſt wicked Treaſons, and Trayterous Compaſſings, Conſultations and Purpoſes ſo between them had, him, our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King, Trayterouſly to kill and murder, and the Romiſh Religion in this Kingdom of England to be uſed, to introduce, and the true Reformed Religion in this Kingdom of England rightly, and by the Laws of the ſame Kingdom eſtabliſhed, to alter and change; and that the ſaid aforeſaid Thomas Pickering, and John Grove, in Execution of their Traiterous Agreement aforeſaid afterwards, to wit, the ſame Four and Twentieth day of April, in the Thirtieth year aforeſaid; and divers other days and times after, at the ſaid aforeſaid Pariſh of St. Giles in the Fields, in the County aforeſaid, Muskets, Piſtols, Swords, Daggers, and other offenſive and cruel Weapons, him, the our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King to kill and murder, falſly, ſubtilely, adviſedly, maliciouſly, and Trayterouſly did prepare, and obtain for themſelves, had and kept, and that they the aforeſaid Thomas Pickering and John Grove afterwards, to wit, the ſaid Four and Twentieth Day of April, in the Thirtieth year aforeſaid, and divers days and times afterwards, with Force and Arms &c. at the Pariſh aforeſaid, in the County aforeſaid, and in other places within the County of Middleſex aforeſaid, falſly, ſubtilely, adviſedly, maliciouſly, deviliſhly and Trayterouſly did lie in wait, and indeavour our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King to murder, and that the ſaid Thomas White, alias Whitebread, William Ireland, John Fenwick, and other falſe Traitors to the Jurors unknown, afterwards, to wit, the ſame Four and Twentieth day of April, in the Thirtieth year aforeſaid, at the Pariſh aforeſaid, in the County of Middleſex aforeſaid, falſly, ſubtilely, adviſedly, maliciouſly, deviliſhly and Trayterouſly did prepare, perſwade, excite, abett, comfort and counſel Four other Perſons, Men to the Jurors unknown, and Subjects5 of our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King, him our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King Trayterouſly to kill and murder againſt the Duty of their Allegiance, againſt the Peace of our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King, his Crown and Dignity, and againſt the Form of the Statute in that Caſe made and provided, and thereupon it was ſo far proceeded, that afterwards, to wit, at the Court of Goal-delivery of our Soveraign Lord the King, of Newgate, at Juſtice Hall in the Old Baily, in the Suburbs of the City of London, in the Pariſh of St. Sepulchre, in the Ward of Farington without, London aforeſaid, the ſeventeenth day of December, in the Thirtieth year aforeſaid, before the Juſtices of our ſaid Lord the King, then and there being preſent, held by adjourment for the County of Middleſex aforeſaid, before whom the Indictment aforeſaid was then depending, came the aforeſaid William Ireland, Thomas Pickering, and John Grove under the Cuſtody of Sir Richard How Knight, Sir John Chapman Knight, Sheriffs of the County of Middleſex aforeſaid, into whoſe Cuſtody, for the Cauſe aforeſaid before that were committed, being there brought to the Bar in their proper Perſons, and immediately being ſeverally ſpoken unto concerning the Premiſſes above charged upon them, how they would acquit themſelves thereof; the aforeſaid William Ireland, Thomas Pickering, and John Grove did ſay that they were not thereof guilty, and for the ſame, for good and bad, they ſeverally put themſelves upon the Country, and by a certain Jury of the Country on that behalf, in due manner Impaneld, ſworn and charged, then and there, in the ſame Court before the Juſtices of Goal delivery aforeſaid were tryed, and that upon that Tryal between our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King, and the aforeſaid William Ireland, Thomas Pickering, and John Grove at London aforeſaid, to wit, at Juſtice Hall in the Old Baily aforeſaid, in the Pariſh and Ward aforeſaid, the Defendant Titus Oates, by the name of Titus Oates, late of the Pariſh of St. Sepulchre aforeſaid, in the Ward aforeſaid, Clerk, was a Witneſs produced on the Behalf of our late Soveraign Lord the King upon the Tryal aforeſaid, and before the aforeſaid Juſtices of Goal-delivery in the Court aforeſaid, then and there held, upon the Holy Evangeliſts of God, to ſpeak and teſtifie the Truth, the whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth, of, and in the Premiſſes between our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King, and the aforeſaid William Ireland, Thomas Pickering, and John Grove, put in Iſſue, was duely ſworn, and that he, the aforeſaid Titus Oates, then and there, in the Court of Goal delivery aforeſaid, upon his Oath aforeſaid, upon the Indictment aforeſaid, at the Pariſh and Ward aforeſaid, by his own proper act and conſent, of his moſt wicked Mind, falſly, voluntarily, and corruptly did ſay, depoſe, ſwear, and to the Jurors of the Jury aforeſaid, then and there ſworn, and Impanel'd to try the Iſſue aforeſaid, between our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the King, and the aforeſaid William Ireland, Thomas Pickering, and John Grove, did give in Evidence, that there was a Trayterous Conſult of Jeſuits that were aſſembled at a certain Tavern, called the White Horſe Tavern in the Strand, (in the White Horſe-Tavern in the Strand, in the County of Midd. aforeſaid, meaning) upon the Four and Twentieth day of April, in the Year of our Lord 1678. At which Conſult, Whitebread, Fenwick, Ireland, (the aforeſaid Thomas White, alias Whitebread, John Fenwick, and William Ireland, meaning) and he the ſaid Titus Oates, were preſent, and that the Jeſuites aforeſaid did ſeparate themſelves into ſeveral leſſer Companies, and that the Jeſuites aforeſaid came to a reſolution to murder the ſaid our late Lord the King, and that he, the ſaid Titus Oates did carry the Reſolution aforeſaid from Chamber to Chamber, and did ſee that Reſolution ſigned by them (the aforeſaid Jeſuites meaning) whereas in truth and in deed; the aforeſaid Titus Oates was not preſent at any Conſult of the Jeſuites at the White Horſe-Tavern aforeſaid, in the Strand, in the County of Middleſex aforeſaid, upon the 24th of April, in the Year of our Lord 1678. nor did carry any Reſolution to murder our ſaid late Lord the King, from Chamber to Chamber by any Perſons to be ſigned; and ſo he the aforeſaid Titus Oates, on the 17th. day of Decemb. in the Thirtieth Year aforeſaid, at the Juſtice Hall aforeſaid, in the Court aforeſaid, upon the Tryal aforeſaid, upon the Indictment aforeſaid, between our ſaid late Lord the King, and the aforeſaid William Ireland, Thomas Pickering, and John Grove, ſo as aforeſaid, had by his own proper act and Conſent, and of his moſt wicked Mind, falſly, voluntarily, and corruptly in manner and form aforeſaid, did commit voluntary and corrupt Perjury, to the great Diſpleaſure of Almighty God, in manifeſt contempt of the Laws of this Kingdom of England, to the Evil and Pernicious Example of all others in like caſe offending, and againſt the Peace of our ſaid late Soveraign Lord the Knig, his Crown and Dignity. Upon this Indictment he has been Arraign'd, and thereunto hath pleaded not Guilty, and for his Tryal hath put himſelf upon the Country,6 and His Majeſtie's Attorney General likewiſe, which Country are you, your Charge is to enquire whether the Defendant be guilty of this Perjury and Offence whereof he is now indicted, or whether not guilty: If you find him Guilty, you are to ſay to, if you find him not guilty you are to ſay ſo, and no more, and hear your Evidence. Cryer, make Proclamation.
Hold Sir, I beg one Favour of your Lordſhip, to give me leave to have that part of the Record, wherein I am ſaid to have ſworn ſuch and ſuch things, read diſtinctly in Latine.
Let it be read in Latin.
Juravit & jur 'jurat' predict 'ad tunc et ibidem jurat' et impanelat 'ad triena exitum predict inter dict' Dn'um noſtrum Regem et prefat' Will'm Ireland, Thomam Pickering, et Iohannem Grove in Evidentiis dedit, quod fuit proditoria Conſultatio, Anglicae; Conſult 'Jeſuit' qui Aſſemblat 'fuer' apud quandam Tabernam, vocat 'the White Horſe Tavern in le Strand. (Le White Horſe Tavern in le Strand in Com' Mid' predict 'innuendo) ſuper viceſimum quartum diem April' Ann. Dom. mileſimo ſexcenteſimo, ſeptuageſimo Octavo, ad quam quidere Conſultationem, Whitebread, Fenwick, Ireland predict 'Thomam White, alias Whitebread, Johannem Fenwick, et William Ireland innuendo) et prefat' Titus Oates fuer 'preſent' et quod Jeſuitae predict 'ſeſe ſeparaver' in ſeperales minores Conventus quodqueJeſuitae predict 'venerunt ad Reſolutionem ad murdrand dictum Dn'um Regem, et quod ipſe idem Titus Oates portavit Reſolutionem predict' a Camera ad Cameram, et videbat Reſolutionem, illam ſignat 'per ipſos (praefat. Jeſuitas innuendo.) That is the Perjury that you are ſaid to have ſworn.
Pray go on Sir, Ubi revera —
Ubi revera et in predict 'Titus Oates non preſens fuit ad aliquam Conſultationem Jeſuit' apud le White Horſe Tavern predict 'in le Strand, in Com' Mid' predict 'ſuper viceſimum quartum diem Aprilis Anno Domini mileſimo ſexcenteſimo ſeptuageſimo octavo, necportavit aliquam Reſolutionem ad d'tum d'num Regem murdrand a Camera ad Cameram per aliquas Perfunas fignand'.
Now, you have read it, go on Sir to make your Proclamation.
Cryer, make an Ho-yes.
Ho-yes, If any one can inform our Soveraign Lord the King, the Kings Sergeant, the Kings Attorney General, or this inqueſt now taken concerning the Perjury and Offence, whereof the Defendant Titus Oates ſtands Indicted; let them come forth, and they ſhall be heard, for now he ſtands upon his Diſcharge.
May it pleaſe your Lordſhip, and you Gentlemen of the Jury —
My Lord, I deſire your Lordſhip and the Court would be of Councel for me in one thing, which I take to be a Fault and Error in my Indictment.
Look you Mr. Oates, whatever you have to ſay of that nature, you muſt not ſpeak to it now, you will have your time as to that hereafter, in caſe you be Convicted.
My Lord, I have but one ſmall exception to open to you.
We are now upon the Fact only.
My Lord, I beg you would give me leave only to tell you of a miſtake in the Indictment, which I hope, when I have opened, will ſatisfie your Lordſhip, that it ought not to be put upon me or the Court to try this Cauſe; or to be ſure, if there ſhould be a Conviction, I hope I may move an Arreſt of the Judgement.
So I tell you you may, but not now.
Good my Lord, hear me but a few Words, the Indictment charges me to have given ſuch and ſuch Evidence, that there was ſuch a Conſult of the Jeſuites at the White-Horſe Tavern in the Strand, the 24th. of April 1678. that the Jeſuites did afterwards divide themſelves in ſeveral leſſer Companies, that they came there to a reſolution to murder the late King, and that I ſwore that I carryed that Reſolution from Chamber to Chamber, and ſaw the Reſolution ſigned by them, ſo the Word is, Signat ', now the Perjury aſſigned is, that I was not preſent at that Conſult, nor did carry the Reſolution from Chamber to Chamber to be ſigned, and there the word is, Signand'; now I conceive if Signat 'be the word, that is uſed in ſetting forth the Oath that I made, The Aſſignment of the Perjury ought to follow that form, and the Word there ought to be Signat' too, being Signand ', I take that to be an Error.
Look, that is not proper at this time, as I told you at firſt, but withal I do not think there is any great matter in what you ſay.
Either I do not underſtand Mr. Oates, what he means by the Objection, or he will find himſelf much miſtaken in it.
Well, well, we have nothing to do with that now, go on with the Cauſe.
May it pleaſe your Lordſhip, and you Gentlemen of the Jury, this is an Indictment againſt Titus Oates for Perjury, which Indictment ſets forth, that Thomas White, alias Whitebread, William Ireland, John Fenwick, Thomas Pickering and John Grove, the Sixteenth of Dec. in the Thirtieth year of the late King, at the Old Baily, were indicted of High Treaſon for conſpiring the Death of the King, and that Ireland, Pickering, and Grove were tryed the 17th. of Decemb. in that year, and upon that Indictment Titus Oates was produced as a Witneſs on the behalf of the King againſt the ſaid Ireland, Pickering and Grove, being ſworn to give Evidence to the Jury that were Impanelled and ſworn to try that Cauſe; he did ſwear and give in evidence, that there was a Treaſonable Conſult of the Jeſuites at the White Horſe Tavern in the Strand, meaning the White Horſe Tavern in the Strand, in the County of Middleſex, the 24th. of April 1678, at which Conſult, Whitebread, Fenwick and Ireland, and the ſaid Titus Oates were preſent, and that they ſeparated themſelves into ſeveral leſſer Clubs, and came to a reſolution to murder the King, and that he, the ſaid Titus Oates carryed the ſaid Reſolution from Chamber to Chamber, to be ſigned by them, meaning the Jeſuites; whereas in Truth and in Fact, he, the ſaid Titus Oates was not preſent at any ſuch Conſult, the Four and Twentieth of April 1678. nor carryed any ſuch Reſolution from Chamber to Chamber to be ſigned, and he the ſaid Titus Oates, the Seventeenth day of December, in the Thirtieth year aforeſaid, at the Old Baily aforeſaid, upon the Tryal aforeſaid, on the Indictment aboveſaid, between the King, and the ſaid Ireland, Pickering and Grove; ſo as aforeſaid had by his own proper Act and Conſent of his moſt wicked Mind falſly, voluntarily and corruptly in manner and form aforeſaid, did commit Wilful and Corrupt Perjury, and this is laid to be to the Diſhonour of God, in contempt of the Law, to the Evil Example of others in the like caſe offending againſt the Kings Peace, Crown and Dignity; to this he has pleaded not Guilty, and that is the Iſſue that you are to try; if we prove him Guilty, we queſtion not but you will find him ſo.
May it pleaſe your Lordſhip, and you Gentlemen that are ſworn, I am of Council in this Cauſe for the King, and our Caſe ſtands thus; the Defendant ſtands indicted for corrupt and wilful Perjury, for what he ſwore at the Tryal of Ireland; and that which he ſwore was this, in order to convict the Priſoner then at the Bar of the High Treaſon they were accuſed of; Oates did ſwear, that upon the 24th. of April 1678. there was a conſult of Jeſuites held at the White Horſe Tavern in the Strand, where Ireland and ſeveral other Jeſuites were preſent, and their buſineſs was to conſult how they might murder and deſtroy the King, and ſubvert the Government; and there they came to a Reſolution that Pickering and Groves ſhould kill the King; and he was preſent at the debate, and he carryed the Reſolution from Chamber to Chamber, where they had ſeparated themſelves in leſſer Numbers; and there he ſaw the Reſolution ſigned; and this is the matter that he ſwore, upon which this Indictment is founded. And Gentlemen, we do charge that this was a falſe Oath, and in a point expreſsly to the matter then in controverſie before that Court; for we ſhall prove he was beyond Sea at that time, and on that day, and in order to his Conviction we ſhall make out by clear Evidence to you as full and plain as ever was given, that from Chriſtmas before, which was in December 1677. till Midſummer after, which was the latter end of June 1678. Oates that ſwears this Conſult in April, was at St. Omers, and in all that time was not abſent from the Colledge there above 24 Hours, and that but once only, which was in January when he played Truant, and went to Watton, which is about two Miles from St. Omers, but otherwiſe he was all along in the Colledge. And my Lord, that we may give ſuch a ſatisfactary Evidence as may make it undeniably plain to the Jury, I deſire your Lordſhip, and you Gentlemen of the Jury would pleaſe to obſerve ſome particular Periods of time, that I ſhall open for the better clearing our Evidence Methodically; and the firſt Period of time is from Mr. Hilſley's leaving St. Omers; now he left St. Omers the fourteenth of April Old ſtile, which is the 24th. of April New ſtile, and then when he came away, he left Oates there at St. Omers; Mr. Hilſley, when he came into England, in Kent in his Journey to London, meets one Mr. Burnaby; this was I ſay in Mr. Hilſleys Return to England from St. Omers, which he left ten days before the time aſſignned by Oates for this Conſult, at the White Horſe Tavern in the Strand, and the next Period is, Mr. Burnaby wa going to St. Omers, and there he arrives in time the 21. of April, old ſtile, and there he sfinds Mr. Oates, who ſwore he was then in London; and by the evidence you will hear that Mr. Oates, according to his uſual cuſtome, and according to8 that Virtue he is endowed with, very boldly inſinuates himſelf into this Gentlemans Company, as he uſes to do with all new Comers; and you will hear from Mr. Burnaby himſelf, and many others, that from the time of his coming to St. Omers, which was the 21. of April, he convers'd with Mr. Oates ſeveral days, every day till after the 24th. of April old ſtile at St. Omers. Then my Lord, another Period of time that I would deſire you to obſerve is, from Mr. Pool's coming from St. Omers, which was in time the 25th. of April old ſtile, the very day after the day that this Conſult was ſworn to be on, and when he came from St. Omers, you will hear from many Witneſſes that he left Oates there, and there he ſtayed. For my Lord, we ſhall, beſides theſe particular times of theſe Gentlemens coming over, who left him there, prove the very day when he left St. Omers, and that was the end of Midſummer day following, which was the 23d. of June; then was the time when Oates came firſt from St. Omers to England, and we ſhall prove he took his leave of them then. My Lord, we have many other Circumſtances that will unanſwerably ſtrengthen this Evidence, and ſhow that our Witneſſes teſtifie nothing but the Truth; one particularly is this; this Gentleman being a Novice of the Houſe, was Reader in the Sodality, as they call it, we ſhall prove that for every Sunday and Holy-Day throughout all April and May, he did officiate in that place, and did read to the Society according as the Cuſtom there is; and we ſhall prove another particular thing, that upon this 24th. of April, he was in the Colledge, by a particular circumſtance, and that by ſeveral Witneſſes; ſo that Gentlemen, not to detain you with any long opening of the matter, if we prove this that I have opened, as we ſhall with a Cloud of Witneſſes, it will make an end of the Queſtion. We ſhall firſt, call our Witneſſes to prove that he ſwore at that Tryal, that ſuch a Conſult was, and he was at it, and then if we prove that he was at another place beyond Sea, at ſuch diſtance that it is impoſſible for him to be here; I do not doubt but the Court and the Jury will conclude he hath willfully and corruptly forſwore himſelf; the ſaid effects of which we are all witneſſes of; it was to take away the Lives of his fellow Subjects wrongfully; and it will appear to the World he has been one of the greateſt Impoſtors that ever did appear upon the Stage, either in this Kingdom, or in any other Nation.
We will now go on with our Evidence, and prove all the parts of the Indictment, and firſt produce the Record of the Tryal of Ireland, and then by Witneſſes Viva voce that were preſent at that Tryal, we ſhall prove what he ſwore, and then prove that Oath of his to be falſe; ſwear Mr. Swift
where is the Record of Ireland's Tryal?
Here it is my Lord.
Is that a true Copy Sir.
Yes, I examined this from the Record, it is a true Copy.
Read it.
If Dr. Oates does deſire, the whole may be read; let it be ſo, otherwiſe a Word of it may ſerve, it being only an Inducement.
Yes, I deſire it may be all read.
It muſt be read, if he will have it.
Well I ſubmit it, I did only offer it, to ſave the time of the Court.
I would ſave the time of the Court too, all that I can; but I think it may be material for me to have the whole read.
In God's name let it be read, we will not hinder you in any thing that may be for your defence.
Memorandum quod —
Now this long Record in Latine is read, I would fain know whether it be to any great purpoſe, but only to ſpend time.
Nay, I think it has not been very edifying to a great many, do you think Mr. Oates, that the Jury, who are Judges of this Fact, do underſtand it.
I cannot tell, may be they may, my Lord.
Do you underſtand it your ſelf Mr. Oates.
That's not any Queſtion here; but to oblige the Court and the Jury, I deſire it may be read in Engliſh too.
No, the Court underſtands it well enough, and they can tell the Jury what it is, it is only the Copy of a Record to prove that Ireland was tryed for High Treaſon at the Old Baily, the 17th. of Dec. 1678,
Now my Lord, we will call our Witneſſes to ſwear what Oates did at that Tryal ſwear: Pray ſwear Mr. Foſter,
Pray Mr. Foſter, will you acquaint the Court and the Jury, whether Dr. Oates was produced as a Witneſs at Ireland's Tryal, and what he did there depoſe about a Conſult in April 78.
My Lord, I was ſo unhappy as to be one of that Jury, by whom Mr. Ireland, Mr. Pickering and Mr. Groves was tryed.
My Lord, we deſire that Mr. Foſter would lift up his Voice, for we cannot hear him.
Truly my Lord, I have been very ſick of late, and am not now very well, and therefore cannot ſpeak louder than I do.
Go nearer the Jury, and ſpeak as loud as you can.
My Lord, I ſay, I did ſee Mr. Oates produced as an Evidence at the Seſſions in the Old Bayly, where I was ſo unhappy as to be a Jury Man, when Mr. Pickering, Mr. Ireland, Mr. Grove and Mr. Whitebread were tryed.
When was that.
It was in December 78.
And what did Oates then ſwear.
I did ſee Mr. Oates ſworn as an Evidence there, in behalf of the King, againſt the Priſoners; and he did then ſwear, that there was a meeting of ſeveral Jeſuites at the White Horſe Tavern in the Strand, upon the 24th. of April 78. and that Mr. Whitebroad, Mr. Ireland and Mr. Fenwick were preſent at the Meeting, and there they did conſult the Death of the King, and the altering of the Religion; and ſome went away and others came; at laſt they reduced themſelves into ſeveral ſmaller Companies or Clubs, and they came to a reſolution, that Pickering and Grove ſhould go on to aſſaſſinate the King, for which the one was to have 1500 Pound, and the other 30000 Maſſes, and that this Reſolution was drawn up by one Mico, (if I am not miſtaken in his name) I have it in my Notes I then took of the Evidence; and he ſwore further, that he himſelf went with this Reſolution to ſeveral of their Chambers, he went to Whitebread's Chamber, and ſaw Whitebread ſign it, he went to Fenwicks Chamber, and ſaw Fenwick ſign it, and went to Irelands Chamber, and ſaw Ireland ſign it, and this was upon the 24th of April 78. My Lord I am poſitive in this, for I had the good hap to take the Notes at the Tryal, for my own help, being a Jury-Man, and I never look't upon thoſe Notes afterwards, till the printed Tryal came out, and then I compared my Notes with the Print, and found them to agree, and I have kept them ever ſince by me, and this is all under my own hand as I have teſtifyed.
My Lord, may I ask this Gentleman a Queſtion.
Ay, if the Kings Councel have done with him.
Yes, my Lord, we have done with him.
Pray my Lord, give me leave to ſit down, for I am not able to ſtand.
My Lord, I deſire you to ask that Gentleman, whether in the Oath that I took, I call'd it a Conſult, or I call'd it a Traiterous Conſult.
Truly I think you call'd it both, if I am not miſtaken, but if your Lordſhip pleaſe, I will look upon my Notes.
You may look upon your Notes to refreſh your Memory, if you will.
Truly I think if it were a Conſult to murder the King, it muſt be a traiterous one without doubt.
Sir, that is not to the Purpoſe, my Queſtion is, what I ſwore it was.
He tells you, he beleives you did ſwear both ways.
At that Conſult he ſaid ſuch a Reſolution was taken, and I think he called it a Traiterous Conſult.
If you pleaſe, I'le tell your Lordſhip the Reaſon, why I asked that Queſtion.
No, you may ſave your ſelf the trouble of that, you beſt know the reaſon of your own Queſtions; he has given you a ſatisfactory anſwer.
Then if your Lordſhip pleaſe, ask him this Queſtion, whether I ſwore that all theſe 3 Jeſuites were preſent at one time, or how many of them.
You hear the Queſtion, what ſay you to it.
Sir, you ſwore that Ireland, Fenwick and Whitebread were at that Conſult, but whether they were all three of them there at one time, I cannot tell, or which of them, were together; but this you did ſwear, that they were there, and came to ſuch a reſolution, and you carryed it to all their Chambers, and did ſee them ſign it.
He gives you a plain account, what you did ſwear, I think Mr. Oates.
Very well, my Lord, I would ask him a third Queſtion if you pleaſe.
Ay, in God's Name, ask him as many Queſtions as you will.
Whether did I ſwear that it was reſolved to kill the King, at the White Horſe Tavern, or whether that Reſolution was made after they ſeparated themſelves into leſſer Clubs.
Mr. Foſter, this is his Queſtion, whether you did apprehend by what he ſwore, that he affirm'd, the Reſolution to kill the King was made at the White Horſe Tavern, or afterwards when they were divided.
They came to a Reſolution, you ſaid, at the White Horſe Tavern, and the Reſolution was there drawn up by one Mico, I think, and it was carryed by you for every one to ſign it from Chamber to Chamber; for I remember you were asked the Queſtion, whether you ſaw them ſign it, and you anſwered that you did carry it, and ſaw them ſign it.
He ſpeaks very plain Mr. Oates.
He anſwers your Queſtion very fully.
Ay my Lord, ſo he does, I am glad of it.
Have you any more Queſtions to ask him?
I would ask him another Queſtion; whether I did ſwear, that I did carry this Reſolution from Chamber to Chamber to be ſigned, or that I carryed it from Chamber to Chamber and ſaw them ſign it.
You did ſwear, that you carryed the Reſolution from Chamber to Chamber, and ſaw them ſign it.
But did you remember it ſo particularly, as to ſay which you ſwore, whether I did carry it to be ſigned, or carryed it, and ſaw them ſign it.
You ſaid, you carryed it to be ſigned, and you ſaw it ſigned.
He tells you for a ſatisfaction in that point, that he does remember you did ſwear it both ways.
He does ſay ſo indeed, but whether it was ſo or no is a doubt.
That will be a Queſtion by and by it may be, if he be in the wrong, I ſuppoſe you can rectifie him.
We are now my Lord upon my Oath, and therefore it concerns me to enquire whether I ſwore as is laid in the Indictment.
You ſay right, it does ſo.
And I the rather ask theſe Queſtions my Lord, becauſe it is ſix years ago ſince that Tryal.
I hope you have not forgot what you ſwore, have you?
My Lord, I think it is fair for me to ask the Witneſſes what they remember after ſo long a time.
'Tis very fair, no body ſays any thing to the contrary.
Then my Lord, I hope I may ask this Gentleman how he comes to remembe all this after ſo long a time.
He has told you already, but tell it him again Mr. Foſter.
Truly it is ſo long ago, that had I not taken all theſe Notes at the Tryal I had not been able to have given ſo good an account.
'Tis a very good reaſon.
'Tis ſo my Lord, I have ſubpoena'd others of the Jury, and they will, I ſuppoſe, give you as good an account.
Have you done with him then.
I have one Queſtion more to ask Mr. Foſter, and that is, whether I ſwore they met all in one Room, at the White Horſe Tavern, or in more than one.
You ſwore they were in ſeveral Rooms.
Then I would ask him this Queſtion my Lord, whether he were then ſatisfied that Ireland was guilty of the High Treaſon he was then indicted.
The meaning of the Queſtion is, I ſuppoſe, whether you did believe Mr. Oates at that time.
Yes, my Lord I had no reaſon to the contrary.
But I would ask you a Queſtion then Mr. Foſter. Do you believe him now? Do you think Mr. Oates he would have found him guilty, if he had not beleived the Evidence againſt him.
We know how Juries have gone alate.
Ay, very ſtrangely indeed Mr. Oates, and I hope ſo as we ſhall never ſee them go again.
My Lord, I have lived ſo long in the City of London without any Blemiſh, that I hope it will not be thought I would give corruptly a Verdict againſt my Conſcience.
My Lord, I ſpeak of later times than Irelands Tryal.
He is an Honeſt Man, I know him.
Good my Lord be pleaſed to hear me.
Nay, you ſhall hear me, as well as I ſhall hear you; I'll aſſure you that, Mr. Oates in plain Engliſh, ask as many Queſtions of the Witneſſes as you will, that are proper to be ask'd; but I'll have no Deſcants, nor Reflections, I know him, and he is very well known in the City of London, he is a Man of very conſiderable Quality, and very good Repute.
I beſeech your Lordſhip to forgive me, if I miſtake in my Queſtions, I do aſſure you I deſign no Reflections on Mr. Foſter.
Ask what Queſtions you will, but do not reflect.
I deſire to ask Mr. Foſter one Queſtion more, and that is, that he would be pleaſed to tell the reaſon why at the beginning of his Evidence he ſaid, it was his unhappineſs to be a Jury Man at that time.
Really Sir, I think it not a happineſs for any Man to be of a Jury, where the Life of a Man is in Queſtion. I aſſure you for my ſelf, I never accounted it ſo, and if I could have avoided it, I ſhould have been very glad to have been excuſed.
I have done with Mr. Foſter.
My Lord, thus we prove what Mr. Oates ſwore at the Tryal, which Mr. Oates himſelf will not deny, for the Fact, Mr. Oates has printed in his Narrative, as we have now proved it.
I intend to produce ſome others of the Jury Men by and by.
Now we ſhall call our Witneſſes to prove that what he then ſwore was falſe.
We call no more to the point, what he did ſwear; but go on to diſprove what he did then ſwear.
My Lord, I would put this Queſtion to the Court, whether this be a Proof ſufficient for this point.
I leave that to the Jury, it is a point of Fact that they are to to try.
I beſeech your Lordſhip that the Court would be pleaſed to give me an Anſwer.
If you ask impertinent Queſtions, the Court is not obliged to anſwer them. Go on Mr. Attorney.
Call Martin Hilſley Eſq and Henry Thornton Eſq Swear Mr. Hilſley,
Come Mr. Hilſley, pray acquaint my Lord and the Jury what time you came from St. Omers, in the year 78.
My Lord, I came from St. Omers the 24th of April New ſtile, where I left the Priſoner Mr. Oates.
From whence did you come, ſay you.
From St. Omers the 24th of April New ſtile.
What year?
In the year 78, that is the fourteenth of April here, and the three and twentieth of April New Stile; I ſaw the Priſoner at St. Omers, and went to School with him, and on the four and twentieth I came from St. Omers, and went to Callis, and from thence into England; but he was never in my Company all the while I was coming for England, though he ſwore he came over with me.
The three and twentieth of April you ſay you ſaw him.
Yes I was with him, that was the day before I came from St. Omers.
You left him there the day before you came away, you ſay.
I did not ſee him that morning that I came away, but here are others that did.
Was he a Scholar there.
Yes, my Lord he was.
Did you know him very well?
Yes my Lord, I did.
Did he come over into England with you?
My Lord, I came from St. Omers to Callis and never ſaw him, from Callis to Dover. I never ſaw him, from Dover to London, I never ſaw him all the way, and I am confident, he was not in the ſame Ship I came over in, for I ſhould have ſeen him if he had.
Was he for ſome time before that conſtantly at St. Omers.
Yes, we went perpetually to School together.
What time did you take ſhipping after you went from St. Omers.
The very next day; the day I went from St. Omers was on the Sunday morning? on Monday I took ſhipping from Callis to Dover, and I arrived at England at ten of the Clock the ſame Night.
When does he ſay he arrived in England.
He ſays he went from St. Omers on the Sunday, he came that Night to Callis, and the next day went on Board from Callis, and came that Night to Dover, that was Monday night.
Yes, I came that Night to Dover, and I lay there that Monday Night, the next day was the 26th of April New Stile.
Where come you then from thence?
I came as far as Bockton Street, and there I lay 4 or 5 days, and then I came to Cittenbourn, and by long Sea from thence to London.
Where did you meet Mr. Burnaby.
I met him hard by there, at a Relations of mine.
Do you remember what day you met him.
I think it was a day or two before I came away from thence to London.
Had you any Diſcourſe with Mr. Oates about your coming into England.
Nothing at all, Sir Francis, that I remember.
What time did you come to London.
I came within a few days to London, I ſtayed 4 or 5 days there by the way; and I ſaw Mr. Burnaby within 4 days, I think, after I came into England. It was about Monday ſeven-night after I came from St. Omers, that I came to London.
That was May New Stile.
That is their Stile. It was ſo.
In our Stile it was the 21. of April.
Pray did you give an account to any Body, after you came to London, that you left Oates at St. Omers, when you came away.
What ſay you Mr. Hanſeys, I did not well underſtand your Queſtion.
Then mind me Sir, It was asked of you whether you had any diſcourſe with any Body, after you came hither, that you had left Mr. Oates behind you at St. Omers.
I did tell ſome Perſons, I left an Engliſh Parſon there, at the ſame time I came away.
Did you not name him, who it was.
Yes, I named him by the Name he went by there, and that was Sampſon Lucy.
To whom did you tell it.
To one Mr. Oſbourn.
Did he go by that Name of Sampſon Lucy in the Colledge.
Yes he did ſometimes, he had three or four Names, he was called ſometimes Titus Ambroſius.
Now my Lord, I deſire I may ask that Gentleman a Queſtion or two.
Ay, if they have done with him.
We have my Lord.
Then ask him what you will.
I deſire my Lord, that you would be pleaſed to ask that Gentleman what Religion he is of: for it is a fair Queſtion, and an equitable one: And that which very nearly concerns me; and I deſire to know where he lives.
What Religion are you of Sir?
I am a Roman Catholick.
Where do you live?
I live in London, I am of the Inner Temple.
He ſays that he is a Roman Catholick, and lives in London.
Pray be pleaſed my Lord, to ask him when he went to St. Omers firſt, and how long he ſtayed there.
My Lord, I was there about ſix years, I preſume it was about the year 1672. when I went there firſt.
Pray ask him what he did there, what was his buſineſs.
That is not a pertinent Queſtion at all, with ſubmiſſion, my Lord.
I beſeech you Mr. Attorney, give me leave to ask my own Queſtions.
Ay, but you muſt ask fair and pertinent Queſtions.
My Lord, I would know what was his employment there at St. Omers.
I know not my ſelf of any particular employment I had, any more than any of the reſt that were there.
But Mr. Oates, you muſt not ask any ſuch Queſtions, what know I, but by asking him the Queſtion; you may make him obnoxious to ſome Penalty, you muſt not ask him any Queſtions to enſnare him.
My Lord, it tends very much to my Defence to have that Queſtion truly anſwered.
But if it tends to your Defence never ſo much, you muſt not ſubject him to a Penalty by your Queſtions.
The nature of my Defence requires an anſwer to that Queſtion.
But ſhall you make a man liable to puniſhment, by enſnaring Queſtions, if a man ſhould ask you what Religion you are of, —
My Lord, I will tell you by and by my reaſon, and I hope a good one, why I ask it.
I do not believe you can have any Reaſon, but to be ſure, we muſt not ſuffer any ſuch entangling Queſtions to be asked.
Pray ask him my Lord, when I came to St. Omers.
When did Oates come to St. Omers.
As well as I remember, he came to St. Omers either the latter end of November, or the beginning of December, in the year 1677. I think it was that year.
I defire you would ask him, whether they were not Prieſts and Jeſuites that govern'd that Houſe.
What a Queſtion is that, I tell you 'tis not fit to be asked.
I demand an anſwer to it, upon the Oath he has taken.
And I tell you, upon the Oath you have taken, you are not bound to anſwer any ſuch Queſtion.
Good my Lord, let my Queſtions be anſwered.
No Sir, they ſhall not: How now, do not think to put Irregularities upon us, if you will behave your ſelf as you ought to do, and keep to that which is proper, well and good.
If your Lordſhip pleaſe, I think this very proper for me.
What, to ask ſuch improper Queſtions as theſe are.
Truly my Lord, I think they are fit Queſtions to be asked.
But we are all of another opinion.
My Lord, I deſire to know, whether they are not ſet on by their Superiours to do this.
That is not a fair Queſtion neither.
Give me leave to make my defence, my Lord, I beſeech you.
Ay, in Gods name; but I pray you then make it in a regular and becoming way; for I know of no Priviledge you have more than other People, to uſe Witneſſes as you do.
My Lord, I look upon my ſelf as hardly uſed in the caſe.
I care not what you look upon your ſelf to be, if you will ask Queſtions, ask none but fair Queſtions, and while you keep within Bounds, you ſhall be heard as well as any of the Kings Subjects; but if you will break out into Queſtions that are impertinent, extravagant, or enſnaring, we muſt correct you, and keep you within proper Limits.
Then my Lord, I ask whether he was not a Witneſs at the Tryal of the Five Jeſuites, and at Langhorn's Tryal.
Ay, that is a proper Queſtion, what ſay you to't Sir.
I was ſo Sir.
Pray my Lord, ask him what Credit he received at thoſe Tryals.
What a Queſtion is that to ask any man.
My Lord, I think it is a fair Queſtion.
No indeed, it is not a fair one at all.
My Lord, I deſire to know what induces him to come here as a Witneſs now,14 ſince it appears that now he comes to give an Evidence that he gave ſix years ago, and was not believed.
My Lord, I am ſubpoena'd.
He has given you an anſwer to the Queſtion, though I think it was an idle Queſtion, and not at all to the purpoſe.
It may be he may have ſome particular reaſon to induce him to it now.
Well, he tells you he came, becauſe he was ſubpoena'd, and that is ſufficient: He is not compellable to be a Witneſs, unleſs he be ſubpoena'd; but if a man will come without a Subpoena, and give Evidence in a Cauſe; that is no objection to his teſtimony.
My Lord, I deſire to know of him, whether he is to have any Reward for ſwearing in this Cauſe.
What ſay you Sir, are you to have any Reward for your Evidence.
None at all as I know of, my Lord, I aſſure you.
He is not paid for his Evidence, Mr. Oates.
If he be, or be not, I cannot tell, nor do I know who ever was paid for it.
Have you any more Queſtions to ask him?
Pray my Lord, I deſire to know what was the occaſion of his coming away from St. Omers.
I had finiſhed my Studies.
Pray my Lord, be pleaſed to ask him, if he never heard of any Conſult of the Jeſuites here in England, in the Month of April 78. and from whom he did hear of it.
I did hear of it among the reſt of the Students of the Colledge.
What did you hear of.
I did hear of a Conſult of ahe Fathers in April 1678.
Yes, there was, but not ſuch an one as Mr. Oates ſpeaks of, nor was he at it.
For what was that Conſult, I pray you.
It was nothing but a Triennial Congregation about the Affairs of the Society.
What were they to do there?
My Lord, I was informed among them there, that it was only what they uſed to have once in 3 years for ordinary Affairs,
My Lord, he pretends to tell when I came thither, I deſire to know of him, from what time it was he ſaw me there, and how often.
Generally every day, as near as I can remember, I think Mr. Oates; you and I, Mr. Oates, went to School in the ſame place.
Pray how many days was I abſent from thence in that time you were there.
You were there generally as often as I, I do not know whether ever you miſt a day or no.
Pray my Lord, will you ask this Gentleman one queſtion more, whether he can particularly tell that he did ſee me every day at St. Omers. For 'tis not enough for him to ſwear that he ſaw me there; but he ought to give an account how he comes to know it by ſome particular Circumſtances.
He has given you ſeveral Circumſtances of his Knowledge, for he ſays he was there all the while from your coming, till 23d. of April New Stile, that he came for England; he ſays he was a Scholar in the ſame Form and Claſs with you, and becauſe he does not remember himſelf to have been abſent, he does not remember you to be abſent neither.
And he ſwears particularly to the very time he came over, which was April 14th. Old Stile.
Well, I have no more Queſtions to ask this Gentleman.
Then call another.
Cryer, call Mr. John Dorrel,
Look ye Mr. Attorney, you did open things at the firſt for Methods ſake by Periods of time; the firſt was Hilſleys coming over, the next was the meeting with Bournaby, now pray obſerve that Method, and call that Bournaby next.
My Lord, we ſhall call him by and by; but we have not done with this buſineſs about Hilſley, we have ſome Witneſſes that will give an Evidence to ſtrengthen and back his Teſtimony. Come Mr. Dorrel, what have you to ſay to this matter.
My Lord, in April 1678. I came from Bruſſels to England, where preſently after I came, I was with one Mr. Oſbourn and my Mother, and there was a Diſcourſe between my Mother and him about Religion.
Where was that.
It was here in England.
Now tell the time when that was.
As near as I can gueſs, it was 15 or 16 of April Old Stile, in the year 1678.
Well Sir, go on with your Story.
My Mother was laughing at his Religion, and telling him ſome ridiculous Stories, and he replyed, there are a great many that are ſo ignorant, that are bred up in the Religion of the Church of England, that they are forced to be ſent to the Colledges abroad to be taught, even ſome of the Clergy of that Church, and particulariz'd in one Sampſon Lucy alias Oates, that was a Scholar at that time at St. Omers, as he was aſſured by a Gentleman that was newly come from thence: My Mother is now ſick, or elſe ſhe would have been here, and would have teſtifyed the ſame I now do.
This Gentleman is a Proteſtant Mr. Oates.
What is your Name Sir, I pray.
My Name is John Dorrel Sir.
Were you never at St. Omers a Student there.
I was there, but before your time Doctor; I had not the happineſs to be there, while you were there.
I pray Sir what Religion are you of.
I am a Papiſt now.
I deſire my Lord, the court would be pleaſed to take notice of it, he owns he was reconciled to the Church of Rome.
Mr. Oates, to ſatisfie you, I went over when I was Child of 12. or 13. years old, and ſo was bread in that perſwaſion.
Well, well, we all obſerve what he ſays.
Pray ſwear Mr. Oſbourn,
My Lord, we call'd this Perſon only to this matter. Pray Sir will you give the Court and the Jury an account what Diſcourſe you had with Mr. Hilſley about Oates, and pray Sir tell the time when it was.
My Lord, I went out of Town the 30th. of April, the year before the pretended Plot was diſcovered by Mr. Oates, and I met with Mr. Hilſley two or three days before, and enquiring of him about the Affairs of St. Omers, he told me of a Miniſter of the Church of England that was come thither to be a Student there, who went under the name of Sampſon Lucy, but his right Name was Oates; I asked him what he pretended to; did he intend to be of that order; he told me, he did believe that he would not be admitted, for his Irregular and Childiſh Behaviour, and that he had left him in the Colledge; and this I afterwards in Diſcourſe told to Madam Dorrel, who is a Proteſtant, and to my Mother, who is ſince dead.
Will Mr. Oates ask this Gentleman any Queſtions.
I only ask him what Religion he is of.
What Religion are you of, Sir?
I am a Roman Catholick my Lord.
Now my Lord, we come to call Mr. Bournaby. Pray ſwear him
Mr. Bournaby, pray will you acquaint my Lord and the Jury, of the time when you came from St. Omers to England; and when you met with Mr. Hilſley.
I met with Hilſley on the 18th of April Old Stile, in the year 78. then I purſued my Journey the following day to St. Omers.
Where did you meet him.
Between Cittenbourn and Canterbury, and afterwards I purſued my Journey from Canterbury to Dover, from thence to Callis, and from thence to St. Omers I arrived at St. Omers the 21. of April Old Stile, which was the firſt of May New Stile, upon the Second of May Mr. Oates was in my Company, I was walking in the Garden, and he came into my Company.
When was it.
The Second of May New Stile, and the Third of May again I went into the Garden, and there he was with me again, and the Fifth of May I ſaw him again.
Where?
In the Rhetorick Form.
But where, in what place?
At St. Omers.
You ſpeak of your own Knowledge, you are ſure you ſaw him there at thoſe Times?
Yes, in the Rhetorick School and in the Garden.
What more do you know of him?
I ſaw him again the 8th of May New Stile, that is the 28th of April Old Stile; I mean by New Stile, that Stile which was uſed in the Place where I was then.
How long was he there before he went away.
I know he was there from the Second of May, the day after I came thither to the 20th of June, and then I went away, or thereabouts.
Did you ſee him daily all that time?
Yes, from day to day he was not out of the Houſe.
Were you a Scholar there with him?
Yes I was.
What year was that.
In the year 78.
Mr. Oates may ask him what Queſtions he will.
My Lord, he ſays he went awaw; I deſire to know whither he did go.
I went away the 20th of June from St. Omers, it is no matter whither I went.
I deſire he may give an account what Religion he is of.
I am a Roman Catholick.
My Lord, I deſire to know whether he be not of that order.
That I will not ask him, I'le aſſure you.
Truly my Lord, I think it is a very hard matter for me to have Jeſuites admitted as Witneſſes in ſuch a cauſe againſt me.
I have told you already, you are not to ask any Queſtions of any Witneſſes that may ſubject them to any Penalty, or make them accuſe themſelves of any Crime.
My Lord, I humbly deſire he would give an account, whether he were not admitted into the Society.
I tell you, he is not to be ask't that queſtion.
He has own'd before.
Do you take your advantage of it, if you can prove it.
Then my Lord, I deſire to ask him, whether or no he did appear as a Witneſs at the Tryal of the 5 Jeſuites.
No my Lord, I did not.
Pray my Lord ask him whether he was not ſummon'd to appear then.
No, I was not.
Pray my Lord ask him what Reward he is to have for coming, and giving this Evidence.
Are you to have any Reward for being a Witneſs in this Cauſe?
None my Lord, that I know of.
That was a proper Queſtion to be asked, and you have a fair Anſwer to it.
Pray Mr. Bournaby, by what name did you go at St. Omers.
By the Name of Blunt.
And what name did he go by there.
Who Sir.
Mr. Oates.
By the Name of Sampſon Lucy.
My Lord, I deſire you to ask him whether he did know of any conſult that was to be held here in London in April 78. and by whom he knew it.
What ſay you Sir, did you know of any Conſult.
No, I neither heard of it, nor knew any thing of it.
Now my Lord, we ſhall go on to another Period of time, and that is concerning Pool. Swear Mr. Pool,
Pray will you acquaint my Lord and the Jury, whether you knew Mr. Bournaby at St. Omers.
Yes, I did Sir.
Do you know the time when he came to St. Omers.
No, I do not remember it.
When did you come over from St. Omers.
The 25th of April.
What Stile?
Old Stile.
In what year?
In the year 78.
Did you know Mr. Oates at St. Omers.
Yes, I did know that Gentleman there.
Was he at St. Omers that time you were there?
Yes he was.
Did you leave him there when you came away?
Yes, I did leave him there when I came away.
Pray tell the Court ſome particular thing why you remember it, and upon what account you came away.
Upon the occaſion of my Brothers Death I came over, and I can tell ſeveral particulars of my Journey, I came away upon the Thurſday, and I came to London upon the Sunday following.
You are ſure you left Mr. Oates there then?
Yes, I am ſure I did leave Mr. Oates there when I came away, and I came away thence the Fifth of May New Stile, the Twenty Fifth of April Old Stile.
Pray how long did you know Mr. Oates there.
I knew him there from Chriſtmas before that.
You were of the Colledge, were you not.
Yes, I was a Student there.
You are ſure he was there all the while.
I do not remember he was a day abſent, and if he had gone away, particular notice would have been taken of it.
Did you ſee him there two or three days before you came away.
I ſaw him that morning I came away.
And what time before.
I ſaw him two or three days before that.
Can you name any particular days?
I ſaw him the firſt of May, and the Second of May, and the fifth of May, which was the 25th of April Old Stile; and then I came away.
Are you ſure you left him there then?
I am ſure I left him there, I can ſwear it without any difficulty at all.
What do you ask him Mr. Oates.
I deſire to know what Religion he is of.
What Religion are you of?
I am a Roman Catholick.
I deſire your Lordſhip would ask him whether he was a Witneſs at the Tryal of the 5 Jeſuites, or at Langhorn's Tryal.
No, I was never an Evidence before in my Life.
Pray my Lord ask him, whether he was not admitted into the Sodality of the Virgin Mary.
No indeed I ſhall ask him no ſuch Queſtion.
Pray my Lord, let him anſwer it.
Prove what you can when it comes to your turn, but ask him no entangling Queſtions.
He has made himſelf liable to a Penalty by being in that Seminary.
I hope a Man may be at St. Omers, and yet not be puniſhed for it, Mr. Oates.
It is my defence to diſable the Witneſſes againſt me.
But they muſt not be askt what may make them accuſe themſelves.
My Lord, it is hard that the Witneſſes ſhall not be made to anſwer my Queſtions.
Pray Sir be quiet, we have told you often enough already, you muſt not think to govern us, it muſt not be allowed.
My Lord, I deſire he may be askt then what Reward he has to come, and ſwear in this Cauſe.
My Lord, I do not know that I am ſo much as to have my Charges born.
Are you to have any Reward.
No, my Lord, that I know of.
Pray my Lord, I deſire he may ask't, what was the occaſion of Mr. Hilſleys coming away from St. Omers.
Indeed I did not examine into the occaſion at all, for I was never a man that medled or made on any ſide, but lived quietly in the Colledge, and minded my Studies.
My Lord, I deſire your Lordſhip to ask him whether he did know of any Conſult of the Jeſuites in April 78. and from whom he knew it.
I know not of any particular Conſult, I heard ſomething in general of a Triennial Congregation, but I cannot ſpeak any thing of my own Knowledge.
My Lord, I deſire to know of him, if he can tell when I came to St. Omers.
Do you know when Oates came to St. Omers?
About Chriſtmas, as near as I can remember, it was the latter end of November.
How much before or after Chriſtmas was it?
I cannot tell exactly.
What year was it in?
In the year 77.
I deſire to know of him my Lord, whether he ſaw me every day at St. Omers at dinner.
I cannot ſay, that ever I knew he was abſent any one day, never 3 days I think I may affirm; but only when he was in the Infirmary.
That's the place where they go when they are Sick.
Pray my Lord, ask him by what name he went, when he was there in the Colledge.
By the name of Killingbeck.
By what name did he go by, I pray you.
By the name of Sampſon Lucy.
Swear Mr. Henry Thornton,
Mr. Thornton, pray where were you in the year 78.
At St. Omers my Lord.
Do you remember Mr. Oates there, do you know him?
Yes, I know him very well.
When did he come thither.
He came there about Chriſtmas 77.
How long did he continue there?
He ſtaid there till St. John Baptiſt's Eve in June 78.
Midſummer you mean.
Yes, the Eve of St. John Baptiſt.
What Stile?
New Stile.
Did you ſee him there all the while?
Yes, I did ſee him every day, I believe, in the Refectory at Dinner time, and at Night in the Dormitory, where all the Collegians have their Beds, I lay over againſt him every Night, I ſaw him particularly upon the day of Hilſley's departure, which was the 24th of April New Stile, and I ſaw him the firſt of May New Stile, upon the coming of Mr. Bournaby to the Colledge; and particularly again I remember him there the 2d of May, when my Schoolfellows exhibited an Action or Play.
Was Mr. Oates there then?
Yes, I ſaw him preſent at it, and I know it by this particular Circumſtance, there was a ſcufflle between him and another about a place to ſee the Play.
Did you ſee him the 23d of April Old Style, that is, the third of May New Style, which was the day after your Play, that you remember?
I do not remember that I did ſee him that day, by any particular circumſtance, though I believe I did.
Do you remember when Mr. Poole came away from St. Omers?
Yes, I do.
When was that?
The 5th of May New Style.
Was Oates at St. Omers at that time?
Yes, he was there then, I am ſure.
Was not he Reader there in the Colledge?
He was Reader in the Sodality, and to my knowledge, he did not miſs once from the 24th of April New Style, to the 24th of May New Style, from being there, and reading in the Sodality.
What did he uſe to read?
Some Spiritual Book or piece of Divinity, or the like, as it was uſual to have read every Sunday and Holidy.
And that is one reaſon why you conclude he was there all that while, becauſe every Sunday and Holiday he was to read, and did read.
Yes, my Lord.
Pray my Lord, be pleaſed to ask this Gentleman what Religion he is of.
A Roman Catholick.
Where does he live?
Where do you live Mr. Thornton?
I am a Northumberland man, that's my Country.
Mr. Lord, I deſire to know of him, when he did come from St. Omers?
I came from St. Omers, my Lord, about two years after that Oates went away from thence.
Pray my Lord, be pleaſed to ask him, who it was that was Rector or Governour of that Houſe or Colledge.
It was one Mr. Richard Aſhby.
Pray my Lord, be pleaſed to ask him, what School he was in there.
I was in Sintaxe, my Lord.
Then my Lord, I would ask him another queſtion, and that is this, whether he was not a Witneſs in behalf of the five Jeſuits and Mr. Langhorn.
No, I was not, my Lord.
My Lord, I deſire to know, if he can tell the occaſion of Mr. Hilſley coming away from St. Omers.
It never concerned me at all, and I never enquired into it.
Then my Lord, I would ask him this queſtion, why he is ſo preciſe as to his Remembrance of what was done in April and May, when he does not give any account of any other time, nor did the other Witneſſes.
Yes, but they do; they give you a particular account from the time of your coming thither, which was about Chriſtmas, ſome ſay the latter end of November, or the beginning of December, they are not poſitive to any particular time, but thereabouts, and ſo from that time all along till June.
I beg your Lordſhips pardon, I did not hear that he ſaid any ſuch thing.
If you will, I'll ask him that queſtion again for your ſatisfaction.
If you pleaſe, my Lord.
Then mind what is ſaid; Do you remember that Oates was there in March before, and in February before?
Yes, I particularly remember in March before, he did read a Ridiculous Book in the Sodality, and he was remarkable in the Houſe by twenty Ridiculous paſſages.
I do acknowledge I did in March read a pleaſant Book, called The Contempt of the Clergy.
By whoſe Order did he read that Book in the Sodality?
I do not know, whether it was by his own election that he was18 Reader there, or by the Command of the Prefect of the Studies, that has the Care of the Students, and appoints them their Buſineſs.
Pray my Lord, be pleaſed to ask him how long he was Reſident at St. Omers.
I was there ſeven years.
You ſaid he was there in June till Midſummer Eve.
Yes, he was ſo.
I own that I was there in June, but that was after I returned from England.
When do you ſay he left the Colledge firſt?
He never left the Colledge from the time of his coming thither firſt till Midſummer Eve, only one time that he was at Watton, and that was but a day or two at moſt, which is not a League out of Town.
Do you remember him there about Chriſtmas time.
Yes, my Lord, very well.
When was it he went to Watton?
About the latter end of January (as I do remember) and in February above Shrovetide I remember him particularly to be there.
Now Mr. Oates, you ſee he ſpeaks to other times beſides April and May, and he brings, upon my word, very notable circumſtances.
He ſays he went to School with me there, I think, my Lord.
No, I ſay he was in the ſame Colledge.
But not in the ſame Claſſis, for it ſeems you were in the Rhetorick Form, and he in the Syntax.
My Lord, he went there by reaſon of his Age, and upon no other account; he might have gone elſewhere with us who were of a lower Form, for any great ſtore of Learning he had.
You hear him, I ſuppoſe, Mr. Oates, he gives no great commendation of your Scholarſhip.
That is nothing to this queſtion; but pray my Lord, be pleaſed to ask him, whether he did not hear of a Conſult of the Jeſuits held here in England in April 78.
What ſay you Sir, Did you hear of any ſuch Conſult?
Yes, my Lord, I did hear of a Triennial Congregation, ſuch as uſed to be held by them, but that did not belong to me to enquire into it.
My Lord, I deſire to know of whom he did hear it.
How do you know there was ſuch a Conſult, who told you of it?
I heard of it in the Houſe, and I had read that it was the Cuſtom of that Society of People to have ſuch a meeting once in three years.
Pray for what purpoſe did they ſo meet?
As I have been told, It was to ſend a Procurator to Rome, and for their managing their other Affairs, which concern'd their Society.
Have the Jeſuits uſually ſuch a Conſult once in three years Sir?
I was never preſent at any ſuch Congregation, I was not capable of it.
But was it us'd to be ſaid ſo?
Yes, my Lord, I have heard it ſaid ſo, and read of it.
Mr. Oates, Will you ask him any more queſtions?
No, my Lord.
Well then, go on Mr. Attorney, and call another Witneſs.
Swear Mr. William Conway
Mr. Conway, pray will you give my Lord and the Jury an account where you were in the year 1677. and in the year 1678.
I was then at St. Omers, my Lord.
Do you remember Mr. Oates there at any time?
Yes, my Lord, I do.
Pray at what time was he there as you remember?
He came in December before Chriſtmas 1677. and did not go away till June 1678.
What time in June did he go away?
About the twentieth of June, I think.
Were you there all that year?
Yes, I was there a Scholar in the Colledge.
Was he all the time you ſpeak of in the Colledge?
He lay out one night.
What time was that?
In January, to the beſt of my remembrance.
Could he be out of the Colledge any time and not be miſt?
No, my Lord, he could not.
Did you miſs him at any time?
No, my Lord.
Was he there in April 1678?
Yes, my Lord.
Can you tell any particular paſſages that can make you remember it?
Yes my Lord, I can.
Tell my Lord and the Jury how you can remember it?
I remember Mr. Hilſley's departure, which was the 24th of April New Style, and ſoon after Mr. Bournaby came, but I do not know the time exactly, I was deſirous to know of Mr. Bournaby whether he met Mr. Hilſley upon the way, and he told me he did meet him, and the next day I ſaw Mr. Oates and Mr. Bournaby walking together very familiarly, and I took particular notice of it at that time, Mr. Bournaby being but newly come, ſo that I took him to have known Mr. Bournaby before, or elſe I concluded him to be a little impudent by his intruding into his company.
Do you remember him in March before?
Yes Sir.
What particulars do you remember of his being there then?
I remember him to be there on the Thurſday in Mid-Lent, the Scholars in the Colledge had a particular Recreation, which they call, Sawing of the Witch, and Mr. Oates was among them, and I was one of them that broke a Pan about his head for Recreation.
Do you remember the firſt of May, that there was in your Colledge a Play acted?
As for the Play, I remember what part Eſquire Pool acted in it, but I remember not any particulars that can make me ſo ſure as to ſwear that Oates were there.
Do you remember any ſcuffling for a place there?
I do not remember it of my own knowledge, I heard of it afterwards.
You ſay that you ſaw Mr. Bournaby and him walking together the next day after he came.
Yes, I did ſo Sir.
Did Oates uſe to read in the Sodality?
My Lord, there was another choſen according to the Cuſtom to read, but Mr. Oates took the Book, and did read.
Did he read conſtantly?
I did never miſs him any Sunday or Holyday all the time.
From what time to what time did he read?
From a little after Eaſter till he went away.
Is it uſually taken notice of in the Colledge when any perſon who is a Student goes away from the Colledge?
There is nothing more diſcourſed of among Scholars, than that when it happens any one goes out of the Colledge.
And pray when did he go away?
In June, about the twentieth, as near as I can remember.
Did you obſerve him at Dinner there conſtantly?
Yes, he ſate by himſelf.
How came that to paſs?
He ſate at a little Table in the Hall by himſelf, for he pretended, being a man in years, he could not Diet as the reſt of the young Students did, and therefore obtained leave to ſit alone at a little Table by himſelf, and he ſate next to the Table of the Fathers, to which all the Students were to make their Reverence before they ſate down.
He was a very Remarkable man by his ſitting by himſelf; Did he ſit there alwaies?
He changed his Table once, and I took notice that he ſate on the other ſide of the Refectory.
When was that I pray, can you remember?
That was a little after Eaſter.
Will Mr. Oates ask him any Queſtions?
Pray my Lord will you ask this Gentleman what Religion he is of?
I am a Roman Catholick.
Pray ask him where he lives.
Where do you live Sir?
Where now at preſent my Lord?
Where do you uſually live?
I am a Flintſhire man, my Lord.
Pray ask him what Name he did go by at St. Omers.
By the name of William Parry.
Pray ask him by what name he gave his Evidence in at the five Jeſuits Tryal.
Were you a Witneſs at the Tryal of the five Jeſuits?
Yes, I was.
By what name did you give your Evidence there?
By the name of Parry.
Then I deſire the Court to take notice he repreſented himſelf by a feigned name in a Court of Record.
I went by both names, my Lord.
Well, make what advantage you can of it by and by.
Pray my Lord ask him, if ever he heard of any Conſult of the Jeſuits held here in England in April 1678?
Yes, I did.
Pray my Lord ask him, who inform'd him of that Conſult.
I heard it among the reſt of the Scholars, and ſeeing ſome of the Fathers go over to it, I was told ſo.
Is it an uſual thing for them to have ſuch meetings?
They have a Congregation ordinarily once in three years.
Does it go by the name of a Conſult, or what name has it?
Some call it a Congregation, and ſome a Conſult.
What is the end of ſuch meeting, as you have heard?
They ſay it was to chuſe a Procurator to ſend to Rome, and give an account of the Province.
My Lord, I would ask him another queſtion, whether he is to have any Reward for giving this Evidence here.
No, not that I know of, but what I expect from Almighty God.
Pray ask him how long he lived at St. Omers.
Five years.
My Lord, I have done with him.
Then call Mr. Haggerſtone, and ſwear him,
Mr. Haggerſtone, pray will you acquaint my Lord and the Jury, were you at St. Omers in the year 1678. with Mr. Oates?
Yes, I was my Lord, I had the honour to be of the ſame Bench with the Doctor of Salamanca.
You mean you were of the ſame Claſs with him.
Yes my Lord, of the ſame Claſs.
In what year was it?
In the year 1678.
In what Form were you?
In the ſame Bench with Doctor Oates in the Rhetorick Form.
Do you remember Mr. Oates in April 1678?
Yes.
What time?
He ſpoke unto me on the 25th of April.
What Style do you mean?
New Style Sir, to avoid confuſion, I ſpeak of the Style of the place where I was; he asked me concerning our School-fellow Mr. Hilſley, who was then gone from the Colledge, whether I had heard any thing from him ſince he21 went away, and he ſpoke of an indiſpoſition he had, for which he preſcribed him a Medicine of Poppy, and he thought it would do his buſineſs effectually.
Who ſaid ſo?
The Doctor of Salamanca, he was called Sampſon Lucy in the Colledge, and likewiſe he forbid him to chew Tobacco, which he us'd to do very much; he was called Titus Ambroſius, he had twenty Names.
Was he there all April Sir?
Yes, he was Sir.
Did you know him in March before?
Yes, he was there all March before.
Was he there in February?
Yes, as near as I can remember, he was abſent but one day, and then he went to Watton in February, or elſe in January.
Do you remember when he came thither firſt?
Yes my Lord, he came in December near Chriſtmas as I remember.
Was it about that time, upon your Oath?
I ſpeak it upon my Oath, it was.
When did he go away?
About the latter end of June.
Was he abſent any time between December and June?
I do not remember that he was abſent, ſave only in January or February, and that was not for above a night, when he went to Watton.
Might not he be abſent, and you not mind it, or know it?
Sure if he had been abſent, we could not but have known it.
How ſo, pray you?
If any goes away, 'tis ſo publick, that it cannot be without notice being taken of it.
Can you remember by any particular token he was there in April or May?
He ſpoke to me on the 29th of April New Style, and told me, that there was a Craving Engliſh-man had been there to beg an Alms, and there was a Collection made for him among the Scholars, but he ſaid he would give him nothing, for he told me he had been cheated by ſuch an one of ſome Pieces of Eight in Spain; this I remember was the 28th or 29th of April New Style, I ſaw him there the firſt of May, upon the ſecond of May there was an Action of the Scholars, and he was preſent at it; the fifth of May I was at School with him, when Mr. Pool went away for England, and I heard him about that time preach a pleaſant Sermon, for he would undertake ſometimes to preach, and he ſaid in it, That the late King Charles the Second halted betwixt two Opinions, and a ſtream of Popery went between his Leggs
Was this in May?
Yes, juſt after Mr. Pool went away for England, and he had ſome pretty Reflections in his Sermon about Toby's Dogg wagging his Tail.
Well, do you ask this Witneſs any queſtion, Mr. Oates?
Pray be pleaſed to ask him, my Lord, what Religion he is of.
I am a Papiſt, my Lord, I am not aſham'd of it.
Pray my Lord, ask where he lives.
At London.
Pray ask him what Country-man he is.
I am a Northumberland man, my Father is Sir Thomas Haggerſtone, a man better known than your Father, Doctor Oates.
Nay, nay, do not be in a paſſion man.
Pray ask him how long I was with him at St. Omers.
For half a year at leaſt.
My Lord, I deſire to know how long he ſtayed there himſelf.
I ſtudied my whole Courſe of Humanity there.
How long were you there in all?
Seven years.
Pray my Lord ask him, whether he knows of any Conſult held, or to be held here in England in April 1678.
Yes, my Lord, I ſaw two of the Fathers go from St. Omers22 to the Congregation, and was there at their return, but all that time I frequented Doctor Oates's company, and he remained in the Colledge.
Pray who were theſe two Fathers?
Mr. Williams and Mr. Marſh; and when they return'd, Oates asked me about it, whether they had been at the Conſult, and I told him there was ſuch a thing, but he never knew it till afterwards; but this I am ſure of, he was never miſſing all the while, I ſate on the ſame Bench with him.
Pray my Lord ask him, what name he went by at St. Omers.
I went by the name of Harry Howard, my Mother was a Howard, Doctor.
Pray ask him whether he came into England when he went away from thence.
No, I went and ſtudied my Philoſophy at Doway.
I deſire to ask him one queſtion more.
Twenty, if you pleaſe, Doctor.
I deſire to know of him the occaſion of Mr. Hilſley's coming away.
I do know it, but truly I cannot tell whether it be fit for me to ſpeak of it, it was upon ſome unhandſome account, but I muſt not blemiſh any Gentleman, I think.
My Lord, I will ask him one queſtion more, whether ever he was admitted into the Society.
I will not ask him that queſtion, how often have I told you no ſuch queſtions are to be ask'd? muſt I make him liable to Penalty? No, ask queſtions that are fair, and you ſhall have a fair anſwer.
My Lord, I have done then with him.
Then ſwear Mr. Robert Beeſton,
Pray Sir, were you at St. Omers in the year 77. and 78?
Yes, my Lord, I was.
Did you ſee Mr. Oates there then? do you know him?
Yes, I know him very well, I did ſee him there.
What months did you ſee him there?
He came there in December, the beginning as I remember, and he ſtayed there to June the latter end.
What years was that in?
He came in 77. and went away in 78.
Did you obſerve him to be there in April and May 78?
The latter end of April, and the beginning of May I did.
Tell the Court particularly how you remember it.
My Lord, I ſaw him the firſt of May at St Omers, where he played at Nine-pins, and I laid a wager upon the ſame ſide that he did, and loſt my money as well as he.
Do you remember any other time?
I ſaw him the ſecond of May, by the ſame token that I met him in the Colledge that day, when our School exhibited an Action in the Hall, and I met him after Supper; now in this Action I had both acted and ſung, and they came and congratulated me for my ſinging; Mr. Oates ſaid, if I had paid for learning to ſing, I had been baſely cheated; and then in the morning I was choſen Reader in the Sodality, the 25th of April, or thereabouts, for a fortnight, and Mr. Oates by his own ſubmiſſion was admitted to Read, only with this condition, that if ever he were wanting, I was to Read again; but this I ſay, I never ſupplied the place; theref•re I am ſure he did continue there all the while, and if he had been out, I muſt have been called upon to Read.
Were you in the Colledge all the time he was there?
Yes, my Lord, I was.
Did you miſs him at any time?
No, I never miſs'd him.
Are you ſure he was not away all that time?
I am ſure, as much as a man can be certain of one that is of the ſame family with himſelf; nay, I am as ſure of it, as that I was there my ſelf.
Can you ſpeak any thing particularly of his Reading?
My Lord, I was to have Read, if he was abſent, but I was never called23 upon to Read, and therefore I may well conclude he was there all the while.
He gives a material Evidence.
Was Mr. Oates ſuch a remarkable man that he muſt be miſs'd?
He was very particular both for Age, and that he had a particular Table to Eat at.
Can you remember any thing elſe?
I remember too, that when Mr. Bournaby came firſt, he was often with him the ſecond, third, and fourth of May, I ſaw him there with Mr. Bournaby, and I took particular notice of the friendſhip between them, which I thought ſtrange between perſons that I ſuppoſed never ſaw one another before.
Have you any Queſtions to ask this man, Mr. Oates?
My Lord, I deſire to ask this Gentleman what Religion he is of.
I am a Roman Catholick.
Pray my Lord be pleaſed to ask him, when he went to St. Omers, and when he came away thence, and how long he was Reſident there.
I know not exactly what year it was I came, but I ſtayed the greateſt part of ſeven years there.
Pray my Lord ask him, what Jeſuits went from St. Omers to the Conſult of April 78.
There was ſome that paſt by, I did not take much notice of them.
Pray my Lord ask him, who it was that informed him of that Conſult.
I do not know who particularly, I only heard of ſuch a Rumour.
Was it an extraordinary thing?
No, It was but an ordinary thing as they uſed to have once in three years.
You ſay you ſaw me every day there.
He ſays he believes he might, becauſe you were Reader in his ſtead, and if you had been abſent, he muſt have been called upon to Read, which he was not, he ſays.
Very well my Lord, I deſire you would ask him, whether he does not remember ſuch a thing as an eight days Exerciſe, wherein thoſe that perform the Exerciſe, are ſeparated from all company during that time.
Yes, my Lord, I do remember that he was once in that eight days Exerciſe, and during the eight days I ſaw him walk in the Garden ſeveral times.
Pray my Lord, ask him if he were an Evidence at the Tryal of the Five Jeſuits, or Langhorn, and whether he gave this Evidence long ago.
No, I did not, I was not there.
Pray my Lord, ask him what Rewards he is to have.
Are you to have any Reward for your Teſtimony, Mr. Beeſton?
No, my Lord.
My Lord, I deſire to know of him, how he comes to be pickt out among the reſt of the Students there, to come here, and be an Evidence in this Cauſe.
My Lord, I was ſubpoena'd by His Majeſty, if I knew any thing of this matter, that I ſhould come here and teſtifie my knowledge.
Pray by what name did he go by at St. Omers?
By the name of Beeſton, as I do now.
And is that his own name?
Yes, my Lord.
Pray go on Mr. Attorney.
Swear Clement Smith,
Pray Sir, were you at St. Omers in the year 77 and 78?
Yes, I was.
Do you remember Mr. Oates there at that time?
Yes, I was in the ſame Claſs with him.
Pray when came he thither, and how long did he ſtay there?
He came a little before Chriſtmas, and ſtayed till June.
Was he not abſent at any time all that while?
No, he was not, except one day.
Do you remember Watton's buſineſs, his going thither in January?
He told me of it, and that he deſign'd to ask the Rector leave to go.
Was he abſent any other time till June?
No, my Lord, for I will tell you, I every day Dined with him, eat24 a Collation with him in the Afternoon, and Breakfaſt and Supp'd in the ſame Refectory, during all that time, except when he or I was in the Infirmary.
When ever he was abſent, he was in the Infirmary, was he?
Yes, my Lord.
Did not he miſs his Breakfaſt at any time all that while?
If he did, we us'd to enquire after him.
Pray when were you in the Infirmary?
The 21th of April New Style, I fell ſick, and I remained ſick till May the 7th, and was in the Infirmary, and then he viſited me almoſt daily, or every other day in the Infirmary; and on the 2d of May I ſaw him and one Mr. Bournaby together, and on the day Mr. Poole departed, which I take to be the fifth of May; Mr. Oates came to me as ſoon as he was gone out of the Houſe, and told me of it; and he did the ſame too that day that Mr. Hilſley went away, which was the 24th of April New Style.
Was not he in the Infirmary himſelf?
Yes, during this time he came into the Infirmary, and was ſick there.
When was that?
A day or two after Mr. Hilſley went away, and continued there two or three days, and I remember it particularly by this circumſtance, that he propoſed a queſtion to the Phyſician about himſelf in Latine, and ſpoke a Solleciſm, which was this, he ſaid, Si placet Dominatio veſtra.
Who did ſay ſo?
You did, he ſays, ſpeak that falſe Latine to the Doctor.
That's falſe Latine indeed.
We know that, but it ſeems it was your Latine.
When came he away from St. Omers?
About the 20th of June, ſomething after the 20th of June, as I remember.
Are you ſure he was not out of the Colledge ſo long as to make a Journey to London, and back again?
No, I am ſure he could not without being miſs'd; and going to School with him, and eating Dinner and Supper with him conſtantly alwaies at the ſame place, I muſt needs know if he had gone.
When went I away from St. Omers does he ſay?
After the 20th of June 78.
He is your old Acquaintance and Schoolfellow, Mr. Oates; you viſited him when he was ſick.
What Religion is this Gentleman of, my Lord, I would know?
I am a Roman Catholick.
I deſire your Lordſhip to ask him how long he liv'd at St. Omers?
Above ſix years.
Pray ask him, when he came away.
A little after Dr. Oates came away.
Did he come directly for England?
No, I did not.
Whither did he go then?
I went about a little. —
Where, my Lord?
I went about to take ſome Turns in the Low-Countrys; I went to Watton, and up and down.
He is a Jeſuit my Lord, and that the World knows, and muſt know.
I know nothing of it, I do aſſure you.
Pray my Lord be pleaſed to ask him, whether he did not hear of a Conſult of Jeſuits in April 78. and what Jeſuits went from St. Omers to it.
I heard it as a Rumour in the Colledge, that there was to be a Congregation at that time, but I know not where particularly it was to be kept; but I know that then there paſs'd by St. Omers two Fathers, Mr. Marſh, and Mr. Williams.
What were they?
Jeſuits.
He told you they were Fathers.
Pray was it an extraordinary, or an ordinary Meeting that?
They us'd to ſay in the Colledge, that it was an ordinary thing to have ſuch a Congregation every three years.
Pray ſwear Mr. Edward Price,
Pray Mr. Price will you give my Lord and the Gentlemen of the Jury an account whether you were at St. Omers in the year 77, and 78.
I was there both theſe years.
Do you remember Mr. Oates there?
Yes my Lord, I do.
When did he come? and when did he go away?
He came there about December 77. and he continued there till June 78.
Was he abſent from St. Omers at any time all that while?
Never, that I know of, but one night at Watton, when he came back the following day, and that was in January.
Do you remember particularly that he was there in April and May 78?
I remember Mr. Hilſley according to the forreign Style left St. Omers upon the 24th of April 78. I was told the following day that Mr. Oates went into the Infirmary, which was Monday the 25th, and ſtayed there a day or two, and upon Wedneſday the 27th I ſaw him going to Maſs; then upon the Sunday following, which was the firſt of May New Style, came Mr. Bournaby to St. Omers, and I ſaw him in Oates's company that day, and I ſaw him on Monday again the ſecond of May in his company; I ſaw him the third of May at the Table, which I particularly remember, becauſe it was the Feaſt of the Invention of the Holy Croſs; the fourth of May I have no Circumſtance to remember him by; but the fifth of May I ſaw him take his leave of Mr. Poole, and I likewiſe ſaw him the 10th or 11th of May at another of our Actions, wherein Mr. Watſon had a quarrel with him, and beat him; I ſhould have miſs'd him above any other man, becauſe he was ſo noted a man.
What was he noted for, for any thing elſe but his diſtinct place in the Refectory?
Yes, he was very abſurd, and alwaies quarrelling with the Students there.
Do you remember him Read in the Sodality?
I was not of that Bench that he was of.
My Lord, I deſire to know what this Gentlemans Religion is.
What Religion are you of Sir?
If your Lordſhip pleaſe to know, I am a Roman Catholick.
My Lord, I deſire to ask him when he went firſt to St. Omers, and when he came away.
I was ſix years at St. Omers; I was there a twelve month before Mr. Oates came thither, and came from thence about three years ago.
Did you come directly to England when you came away?
My Lord, I went to Leige to ſtudy Philoſophy, and I live now with my Father at home.
My Lord, I deſire to ask him whether he did not hear of a Conſult to be held in April 78.
I did hear there was a Congregation which was their uſual Triennial meeting, and particularly I remember about that time there came Mr. Williams, and Mr. Marſh, and it was reported that they were going to the Congregation.
I deſire to ask him if he was not a Witneſs at the Tryal of the five Jeſuits, or at the Tryal of Langhorne.
No, I was not.
Pray what name did he go by at St. Omers?
By my own name, which is Edward Price.
Then ſwear the next, that is Mr. James Doddington.
Pray Sir were you at St. Omers in the year 77 and 78?
Yes Sir, I was.
Did you know that Gentleman Mr. Oates there?
I know him very well.
What time did he come to St. Omers, and how long did he ſtay there?
He came about Chriſtmas, and ſtayed about the latter end of June.
How do you remember he ſtayed there ſo long, what Circumſtances have you to make you remember it?
In general his Converſation and Canting Stories after Dinner and Supper, and times of Recreation, made him ſo remarkable, that no body could miſs him all the time he was there.
Did you obſerve him to be in the Hall, or at the Exerciſes?
Yes, I ſaw him ſeveral times.
Do you remember the time Mr. Hilſley went away?
Yes, it was a little after Eaſter, and I do remember that two or three days after I went into the Infirmary, and ſaw Mr. Oates there, and had diſcourſes with him.
Do you remember Mr. Bournaby's coming to St. Omers, and when was it?
Yes, the firſt of May Mr. Bournaby came to St. Omers, and the next day I ſaw Oates with him, and for ten or twelve daies ſucceſſively they were in one anothers company, and then of a ſudden the Correſpondence broke off, but I know not upon what account.
Was he Reader there as you remember?
I do remember he did Read in the Sodality.
When was that?
I remember he Read at Shrovetide.
Did you hear me Read there?
Yes that I did Sir.
Were you of the Sodality?
Yes, I was Sir.
Do you remember the time when he came away from St. Omers?
It was about Midſummer, my Lord.
Were you out of the Colledge your ſelf at any time when he was there?
No, I was not.
Come, I will ask you a plain Queſtion; Was he ſo long at any time out of the Colledge as to come to London and ſtay here two or three daies, and come back again?
My Lord, he was ſo Remarkable by his Stories and Ridiculous Actions, and falling out with every one of the Colledge, that if he had been abſent, we muſt needs have miſſed him.
Did you miſs him at any time?
My Lord, I never miſs'd him but one day.
When was that?
They ſaid he was gone to Watton.
What time was that?
In January, about ſix weeks after he came firſt.
Pray my Lord, ask him what Religion he is of.
I am a Roman Catholick.
And a Scholar of St. Omers.
Make your Remarks by and by.
Pray my Lord, ask him what Name he went by at St. Omers.
By the Name of Hollis, my Lord.
Pray my Lord ask him, how long he was Reſident there.
Near upon five years.
Pray my Lord, ask him the occaſion of his coming over at firſt.
I had buſineſs in England, and I had a mind to ſee my Friends.
Pray my Lord, ask him whether he did not pretend at the five Jeſuits Tryal, that he came over upon the King's Proclamation, to call home thoſe that were in the Seminaries.
Were you at the Tryal of the five Jeſuits?
Yes, I was; but if I came over upon the King's Proclamation, what hurt is there in that?
None at all, as I know of.
Pray my Lord, ask him whether he did return again to St. Omers or no.
My Lord, I paſs'd by St. Omers once, but I never ſtay'd a day in the Colledge ſince.
Pray my Lord be pleaſed to ask him, whether he ever heard of a Conſult of the Jeſuits in April 78.
I did hear of a Congregation.
Call it a Conſult or a Congregation, it is all one.
He ſays he did hear of it.
Ask him by whom he did hear of it.
I ſaw the Provincial when he came back from England.
Who was that Provincial, what was his Name?
Mr. Whitebread.
Was not Mr. Whitebread a Reſident ſometimes at St. Omers?
Yes a while he was.
Pray was not that Houſe under his Government?
My Lord, I can give no account of that, but it is generally under the Government of the Rector of St. Omers.
Pray Sir, give me leave to ask you one Queſtion Mr. Oates ſpeaks of Mr. Whitebread; Pray how did Mr. Whitebread uſe Oates, when he came back from England?
I heard ſay, he did check him very ſeverely for his many miſcarriages.
He heard it, he ſays, but he does not know it of his own knowledge; that is no Evidence.
Pray ſwear Mr. William Gerrard,
Were you at St. Omers, Mr. Gerrard, in the years 77. and 78?
Yes, I was.
Did you know Mr. Oates there?
Where is he Sir?
There he is in that corner, do you know him?
Yes.
When came he to St. Omers?
He came to St. Omers in the year of our Lord 77. and he went away in June 78.
Was he there all the time?
I never remembred to have miſs'd him, but only once when he went to Watton for a night.
By what Tokens do you remember him at any time there in April or May?
The ſecond of May we had a Play, and he was there then, and I remember the 26th of May he was confirmed, and ſo was I, it being St. Auguſtin's day, and in the Refectory he had a Table by himſelf, and I uſed alwaies at mealtimes to paſs by that Table and make a Bow to the Fathers above before I ſate down at Table; and I do not remember that ever he was abſent, and if he had, I ſhould ſurely have miſs'd him.
When was St. Auguſtin's day, that you ſay you and he were confirm'd?
It was the 26th of May.
Do you remember him in April there?
I cannot tell any particular circumſtance in April, but I do not remember to have miſs'd him at all in April.
But you ſaw him there the ſecond of May, you ſay.
Yes, I did ſo, and the 26th of May.
The 26th of May Old Style, I was there my Lord.
Ay, but he ſays the 26th of May New Style.
I was not there then, my Lord.
He ſwears you were.
Pray between the ſecond and 27th of May New Style was he abſent from St. Omers at any time?
I never remember to have miſs'd him at all in that time.
Do you remember Mr. Pool's and Mr. Hilſley's going away?
I do remember Mr. Hilſley's and Mr. Pool's going away, but I cannot ſpeak particularly and exactly what time that was.
Is it uſual to have Scholars go away without being miſs'd?
No, my Lord, and he had a particular place by himſelf.
Pray ask him, my Lord, how he came to know that I went away in June?
We miſs'd him in his place then, and 'twas diſcourſed of all over the Town, that when the Provincial came, he was to be diſmiſs'd.
I deſire to know what Religion this Gentleman is of.
My Lord, I am a Roman Catholick.
Pray my Lord, ask him what Name he went by at St. Omers.
By the Name of William Clovell.
Pray my Lord ask him, when he went to St. Omers, and how long he was Reſident there.
I came there about two years before he came, and was there about two years after he went away.
Pray my Lord ask him, whether he came directly for England when he left St. Omers.
No, my Lord, I was four years in Low Germany and France, and came into England the laſt year.
Pray Sir, were you a Witneſs at the five Jeſuits Tryal, or at Langhorns Tryal?
No, I was not; I came but laſt year to England, I tell you.
Pray my Lord ask this Gentleman, whether he did not know or hear of a Conſult of Jeſuits that was to be in April 78. and from whom he heard it.
My Lord, I know it is the Cuſtom of the Fathers of that Order to have a Congregation once in three years, about the Affairs of their Society, but then no Perſon is admitted to be one of that Congregation, but them that have been eighteen years Jeſuits, and he not having been ſo much as a Novice, I know not how, if he had been here, he could have been preſent at it.
He ſays, that there us'd to be a Triennial Congregation for the Buſineſs of the Society, but you could not be preſent at it, becauſe you had not been eighteen years a Jeſuit.
An. decimo octavo Currente, is the word of the Rule.
Pray my Lord ask him this Queſtion, how he knows that to be the Rule.
You or any man may Read them in their Books.
It ſeems he has Read them, and he ſays, you muſt paſs through eighteen years before you be admitted of the Congregation, and he believes you were not there, for you were not capable of ſo much as a Noviceſhip.
I deſire your Lordſhip to ask him, whether or no he heard me Read in the Sodality.
Yes, I did.
Were you of the Sodality?
Yes, I was.
Pray my Lord ask him, what Oaths are there taken before they be admitted into the Sodality.
No, by no means, I will not do it.
Why my Lord, may not I ask it, to ſhew what kind of men theſe are?
No indeed, it is but the ſame Queſtion again, that I told you before is not to be asked, for it may make him liable to a Penalty; if you come to be a Witneſs, no man ſhould ask you a Queſtion that might make you obnoxious to a Penalty, no more muſt you ask them any ſuch Queſtions.
I have done with him my Lord.
Where is my Lord Gerrard of Bromeley?
Here I am Sir.
Pray my Lord, do you remember Mr. Oates at St. Omers in the year 77. and 78?
He was diſguiſed in another Habit, and another colour'd Perriwig, the Hair was blacker than that he has on now, but I remember his Face very well, and know him again by the Tone of his Voice, which was very remarkable, but I never remember that he was abſent from St. Omers after he came thither. I remember his coming exactly, which was about Chriſtmas; nor did I ever hear that he was abſent till June 78. New Style, when he went away.
Do you remember, my Lord, when Mr. Bournaby came?
I do remember Mr. Bournaby's coming, but what time it was I cannot exactly tell.
Is my Lord Gerrard ſworn?
I think ſo.
No, my Lord, I am not ſworn.
You muſt be ſworn my Lord
now if you be pleaſed to ask my Lord any Queſtions, do.
My Lord, we deſire to know of my Lord Gerrard of Bromeley, whether he knew Mr. Oates at St. Omers.
My Lord, I remember he came in 77. as I take it, it was the beginning of December, and never heard he was abſent or miſs'd till June 78. I remember particularly upon the 25th of March, there was a new Lector to be Reader of the Sodality, and Mr. Oates deſiring it, he was appointed to Read; I was there my ſelf, and I never miſs'd him; I heard him Read, that I do remember ſeveral Sundays and Holidays, and never knew him abſent any one; however, for five or ſix weeks he was conſtant at Reading, and I can the better remember it, becauſe he had a particular Cant in his Tone, which all men may know, which ever converſed with him.
If Oates pleaſe to ask my Lord Gerrard any Queſtions, he may.
Pray my Lord let me ſpeak a word or two more.
Ay my Lord, pray go on.
I remember I heard Mr. Oates was at the Confirmation which was upon St. Auſtins day, there was a Confirmation by a Catholick Biſhop about the 26 of May New Style, I Remember I heard Mr. Oates was there, and the Biſhop did particularly note him as a perſon of elder years than the reſt of the Students.
Do you know this my Lord, of your own knowledge?
I do my Lord.
Becauſe you ſay you heard it.
My Lord further I remember this, when the News of the Plot being diſcovered by Oates, came to St. Omers, where he went by the name of Sampſon Lucy, and ſometimes Titus Ambroſius, it was wondered by all the Scholars that knew him there, how he came to be ſo impudent to pretend that he was at ſuch a Conſult the 24th of April. 78. when all the Colledge ſaw him every day in April and May at St. Omers, as much as a man can be ſeen in a Family, and was never known to be abſent ſo much as one day; beſides my Lord, 'tis a thing as generally noted as a thing can be, that no Scholar goes away from, or comes to the Colledge of St. Omers, but it is particularly known to the whole houſe; It is the Common News and Diſcourſe as much as any new occurrences is here about the Town.
If Oates be pleaſed to ask him any queſtions, he may.
My Lord, I deſire this Noble Lord may be ask'd a queſtion or two; I do not Remember his Lordſhip there.
I do very well remember the man by particular Remarques.
Yes my Lord, you have occaſion to remember me, and ſo have your whole Party. Pray my Lord let my Lord Gerrard be ask'd what name his Lordſhip went by at St. Omers.
Mr. Oates. I am not difficult in telling the name I went by there. It was Clovel.
Pray my Lord I deſire to know what Religion his Lordſhip is of.
Neither am I aſham'd to own my Religion. Mr. Oates. I am a Catholick.
Pray my Lord, If you pleaſe, becauſe this Noble Lord pretends he heard me Read, I deſire to know of him whether he was of the Sodality.
I remember you particularly by your voice, and that is one thing that particularly brings you to my Remembrance now.
Pray ask this Noble Lord if he was a witneſs at the Jeſuites Tryal.
No, I was never a witneſs in my Life before; By the oath that I have taken.
'Tis very well my Lord.
Pray my Lord ask this Nobleman, whether he did not know of a Conſult in April 78. and from whom he knew it.
No, I know of none, nor heard of any but by Rumour after that you pretended to diſcover ſuch a thing.
Did his Lordſhip ſee me every day, does he ſay.
I cannot ſay every day, but I ſaw him at the Refectory generally, and I remember it particularly, becauſe he ſat at a Table by himſelf; I believe he could not be abſent without being miſs'd, becauſe we knew every perſon that came in and went out.
Then Swear Mr. Samuel Morgan
Mr. Morgan were you at St. Omers in 77 and 78?
I was my Lord.
Did you obſerve Mr. Oates to be there at that time?
Yes I did.
Pray give an account when he came, and when he went away.
He came 14 or 15 daies before Chriſtmas as I Remember, and went away in June.
What Chriſtmas do you mean, Mr. Morgan?
Chriſtmas 77.
And when did he go away?
In June 78. he went away.
Was he abſent any time during that ſpace?
My Lord, I know not that he was ever abſent above one night in all that time.
What time was that one night?
Truly my Lord I cannot tell what month it was very exactly.
Whither was he gone that night?
He went to Watton, three miles off from St. Omers.
Do you remember the time when Mr. Hilſley came away, and when Mr. Bournaby came to St. Omers?
Yes, I do my Lord, very well.
Was Mr. Oates there when Hilſley went away?
He was there then.
Was he there when Mr. Bournaby came?
He was there when Mr. Bournaby came thither.
Was he there when Mr. Poole came away?
Yes my Lord he was ſo.
I will ask you this ſhort queſtion, do you believe in your Conſcience that he was abſent any particular time all that while?
No my Lord, I have no reaſon to believe ſo.
Pray my Lord ask him what Religion he is of.
I am of the Church of England.
When were you reconciled to the Church of England?
Five years ſince.
I deſire to know of him, what induc'd him to be reconciled to the Church of England.
That is not a pertinent queſtion, nor fit to be asked. Is he to give an account of his faith here?
It ſeems Mr. Oates is angry when the witneſſes are Papiſts, and when they are Proteſtants too.
When was it that I came to St Omers do you ſay?
You came thither in December 77.
So he told you before, why do you repeat things over and over again?
When was it I went away from thence ſay you?
In June 78.
Do you remember 24th of April Old Style that year?
Yes my Lord, I do remember it very well.
Do you remember him to be at St. Omers that day?
Yes, I do, by this circumſtance.
Ay, pray tell my Lord and the Jury that circumſtance, how you come to remember it.
We had the Tryal of Ireland brought over to us ſoon after it was Printed, and there we found mention'd that Mr. Oates had depoſed that the 24th of April 78. there was a Conſult of the Jeſuits, and they met at the White Horſe Tavern, where they reſolved to kill the King, and he carried that Reſolution from Chamber to Chamber, and he did nominate the day, and having it then freſh in my memory, though he ſwore that he was the 24th of April Old Style in London at that Conſult, yet I found him to be at St. Omers by a very particular circumſtance: My Lord, I was playing at Ball that day, and ſtruck it over into a Court, into which I could not get over my ſelf, but I ſaw Mr. Oates then walking in the Court, and I came and borrowed his Key, and ſo went in, and there paſſed between us words of friendſhip.
When was this, do you ſay?
The 24th of April 78. Old Style.
I deſire to let his Orders be ſeen.
No, he ſhall not be put to ſhew any ſuch thing.
He is a Miniſter of the Church of England, my Lord.
Sir, we tell you we will not do it, what ado is here with your impertinent Queſtions, have not I told you you ſhall not enſnare the Witneſſes?
He was a going to pull out his Orders himſelf.
My Lord, Mr. Oates may ſee them if he will, he is a Benefic'd Miniſter of the Church of England.
Does he mean thoſe Orders?
Yes, he does, and here they are.
Let him ſee them,
My Lord, I deſire to know of this Gentleman, what Name he went by at St. Omers.
By the name of Morgan.
Swear Mr. Arundel,
Pray Sir, will you give an account in ſhort whether you were at St. Omers in 77. and 78. and the time when Oates came thither, and when he went away.
I was there when Dr. Oates came, and when he went away.
When was that?
Sir, I cannot be poſitive to the time exactly, but I think it was about January 77. that he came there, and he went away about June 78. I cannot be poſitive to the time exactly.
He does not particularly remember the time, but he thinks it was about January 77. he came thither.
I beg your Lordſhip pardon, he came there about December.
Do you remember any particular circumſtances that you ſaw him there at any particular time?
Upon St. Auguſtines day I ſaw him Confirm'd.
What day is that?
The 26th of May according to the Forreign Account.
Did you know him there then?
Yes my Lord, I ſay I ſaw him Confirm'd.
Do you remember Mr. Hilſley's going away?
I do not remember the time particularly, but I do remember Mr. Oates was actually there then.
Do you remember when Mr. Bournaby came to St. Omers?
No, I do not remember the time, but he was there then too.
Do you remember when Mr. Poole went away?
No, I cannot tell what day it was, but he was there at the time of his going away, upon my Oath.
Can you tell any other particular time?
The 11th of May New Style there was an Action exhibited in the Colledge.
Was Oates there then?
To the beſt of my remembrance he was.
He does not affirm any particular, but only ſpeaks in general.
Are you a Proteſtant too Sir?
No, Doctor, I am not.
Pray my Lord, I deſire to know what Religion he is of.
I am a Papiſt my Lord.
Pray ask him by what Name he went at St. Omers.
I believe you know that as well as I Doctor Oates.
You muſt anſwer his Queſtion.
I went by the Name of Spencer my Lord.
I do remember him my Lord, to have been there.
Sir, your humble Servant.
It is almoſt ſeven years ago, my Lord, and I may not ſo well remember them as they do me, but I deſire to know when he went to St. Omers firſt, and how long he was there.
I was there ſeven years.
Pray my Lord, ask him whether he was of the Sodality.
Yes my Lord, I was.
Was he Reader of the Sodality?
Yes my Lord, in my time he was Reader.
Then my Lord I deſire to ask him, whether ever he heard of a Conſult of the Jeſuits, that was to be held in England in April 78. and from whom he heard it.
Yes my Lord, I did hear in the Colledge of a Congregation.
Was that an extraordinary one, or of courſe?
It was only of courſe, as they told us, once in three years they have one.
Pray my Lord be pleaſed to ask this Gentleman what Studies he followed at St. Omers.
He was of the Sodality, he ſays.
My Lord, I ſtudied to the end of Rhetorick.
My Lord, I deſire to know whether when he came from St. Omers, he did come directly for England.
No, I went from thence to Paris, my Lord.
Swear Mr Chriſtopher Turbervile,
Pray Mr. Turbervile, will you acquaint my Lord and the Jury whether you were with Mr. Oates at St. Omers, and when.
Yes my Lord; he went by the Name of Sampſon Lucy there, and there I ſaw him, and there I was with him all the time; I was there before him, and I remained there after he went away.
What time did he come to St. Omers, I pray you?
Before Chriſtmas.
In what year?
In the year 77.
What time was it he went away?
In June 78.
Were you there all that while at St. Omers?
Yes, I was.
And to the beſt of your apprehenſion, you think he was there all that while.
Yes, I do ſo my Lord
Can you ſpeak of any particular daies you can remember?
Yes, I do remember him upon the 4th, 5th, and 6th of May, for two or three daies together; for my Lord, I do remember this circumſtance, Mr. Poole about that time went away, and that very day Mr. Poole went from the Colledge, I changed my Lodging, and went into his Lodging, and that day I ſaw Doctor Oates in the Chamber, and by the Chamber door.
Did he continue in the Colledge from the time he came about Chriſtmas, to the time he went away in June?
Yes he did, all the while except it were one night in January when he went to Watton.
What time in June did he go away?
I am not poſitive, but I am morally ſure he went away the 23th of June, as near as I can remember.
I was there in June, that is very well known.
What do you remember of his Reading in the Colledge?
I do remember he was Reader there on Sundays and Holidays for a great while; I cannot ſwear upon what Sunday he began, but he left off the Sunday before he went away.
As near as you can remember, when did he begin to Read?
It was the beginning of April, or latter end of March, I cannot juſtly ſwear which it was
Did he Read on Holidays as well as Sundays?
Yes he did
I muſt ask this Gentleman one Queſtion, if your Lordſhip pleaſe, and that is this, what Name he went by at St. Omers.
I went there by the name of Farmer.
Pray you my Lord, ask him what Religion he is of.
It is a hard Queſtion to anſwer that.
Nay my Lord, I deſire to know what is his Religion.
I am my Lord, a Roman Catholick.
Ask him when he went to St Omers firſt, and how long he ſtayed there.
I was there ſeven years very near.
I deſire to know whether he did come away directly to England when he came from St. Omers.
No, my Lord, I went into Italy.
Pray you my Lord, I deſire to know whether he did go to Rome.
What if he did, what then? that is not at all to the purpoſe, he went into Italy.
Pray my Lord, be pleaſed to ask him this Queſtion further, was he a Witneſs on the behalf of the five Jeſuits, or of Langhorne at their Tryals.
No, my Lord, I was not.
Pray my Lord be pleaſed to ask him then what Reward he has been promiſed, or is to have for giving this Evidence.
None at all, my Lord.
Pray my Lord ask him, whether or no he heard of any Conſult of the Jeſuits in April 78 and from whom.
There was a Congregation, as I heard, but I do not remember that any of the Fathers went from the Colledge to it; ſeveral came by there, and lodged there as they went, and as they came back.
Pray my Lord ask him how he came here to be a Witneſs in this Cauſe.
I was ſubpoena'd.
Who ſerv•d the Subpoena upon him?
The Managers; it was ſent to me by the King's Councel, I ſuppoſe; a man brought it to me.
'Tis no matter who brought it you, you were ſubpoena'd, that's enough.
Swear Mr. Anthony Turbervile,
Were you at St. Omers in 77, and 78?
Yes, my Lord, I was.
Did you obſerve the Defendant Mr. Oates there at that time?
Yes, I obſerv'd him all the while he was there.
When did he come to St. Omers?
In the year 77, about Chriſtmas.
When went he away?
A Gentleman who was formerly ſworn, (Mr. Thornton) and I were at Breakfaſt with him the ſelf-ſame time when he went away.
When was that?
I ſuppoſe about the latter-end of June 78.
Did you obſerve him to be there in April or May 78?
He was not abſent above one night in January that I can remember from his firſt coming thither, for it was impoſſible he ſhould be abſent and not miſs'd, he ſitting at a diſtinct Table by himſelf, and his Converſation being ſo remarkable for a great many ridiculous actions, and a great many pretty jeſts that he us'd, ſo that he was like a ſilly perſon, as I may call him, that us'd to make ſport, and no body could be miſs'd ſo ſoon as he: And I ſaw a little Boy in the Colledge beat him up and down with a Foxes Tail. Indeed, my Lord, all his actions were very remarkable: I ſee him very much abuſive to perſons that liv'd with him in the Colledge; and Mr. Oates could not be a perſon of this note, but all the world muſt take notice of him, and all that knew him muſt miſs him, if he were away.
You hear him, Mr. Oates; he gives you a particular Character; he ſays you were a very notorious perſon in many inſtances.
My Lord, I was a perſon then the youngeſt in the whole Company, and Mr. Oates being very abuſive to me, I did what became me to right my ſelf upon him.
Pray, my Lord, be pleas'd to ask this Gentleman what the Name was he went by at St. Omers?
By my Grandmothers Name, which was Farmer.
Do you remember the time when Mr. Hildeſley went away from St. Omers?
He went away upon a Sunday. Mr. Oates remain'd afterwards there: I am poſitive I ſaw him ſeveral days after.
Do you remember when Mr. Burnaby came thither?
Yes, my Lord; and Mr. Oates was there then.
Will you ask him any queſtions? If you are not ready, I will ask him ſome for you. Come, what Religion are you of?
I am a Roman Catholick, my Lord.
Well, and how long were you at St. Omers?
Six years and upward, my Lord.
When you came away from thence, did you come directly for England?
I took a circumference round.
My Lord, I do find my Defence is under a very great prejudice.
Why ſo? becauſe we won't let you ask impertinent queſtions, or ſuch as may render the Witneſſes obnoxious to a Penalty.
No, my Lord, it is not fit they ſhould, for there is a Turn to be ſerv'd.
What do you mean by that? Ay, and a good Turn too, if theſe Witneſſes ſwear true: 'Tis to bring Truth to light, and perjur'd Villains to condign puniſhment.
Good my Lord be pleaſed to hear me.
If you behave not your ſelf with that reſpect to the Court as you ought, pray get you gone. Do you think you ſhall give ſuch language as this in a Court of Juſtice?
My Lord, I did not deſign —
If you behave your ſelf as you ſhould, you ſhall have all due regard; but if you flie out into ſuch abuſive extravagancies, we'll calm you as you ought to be calm'd.
I would vindicate my ſelf, I meant it not of the Court.
So you had need. Don't think we ſit here to let you aſperſe the Juſtice of the Court and of the Nation, as if the Judges ſate here to ſerve a Turn.
I ſay theſe men do come to ſerve a Turn; but I laid no aſperſion upon the Court, nor meant it of them.
Behave your ſelf as you ought, and you ſhall be heard with all the fairneſs can be deſir'd.
I did perceive your Lordſhip and the Court made your ſelves pleaſant with my queſtions.
I did not make my ſelf pleaſant with your queſtions, but when you ask impertinent ones you muſt be corrected: You ſee we do the ſame thing with them; I find fault with nothing but what is not to the purpoſe.
My Lord, I deſire it may be obſerv'd, that theſe men that come now, are the ſame Witneſſes that appeared at the Old-Bailey, and were not believed there.
Obſerve what you will by and by.
No, they are other Men, but they bear the ſame Teſtimony indeed.
Swear Mr. Clavering,
Come, Sir, I'll ask you a ſhort queſtion: Were you at St. Omers with Mr. Oates, and when?
Yes, I was: I came the 10th of December 77 to St. Omers, he told me he came thither that day too, and I liv'd there all the time that he was there, which was till towards the middle of Summer: I do not remember that he ever was abſent, but once at Watton.
Do you remember Mr. Burnaby's coming thither?
Mr. Oates was there when Mr. Burnaby came there.
Was he there when Pool came away?
He was there when Mr. Pool went away, and likewiſe I remember his being there at the time of the Congregation.
Pray tell the circumſtance how you know he was there then.
There came a Gentleman there that deſir'd a Charity of the Students, and I was the perſon that made the collection for him in the houſe; and I remember he did ask if there was any one that was a Student there that had been in Spain: We told him there was one, and deſcrib'd him, upon which he knew the Gentleman in Spain; upon that I told Mr. Oates that there was one there that knew him, but he deny'd to come and ſpeak with him. Now I remember that it was the time of the Congregation, for ſome enquiry made why he got ſo little money at Watton, and it was ſaid it was becauſe the Fathers were gone to the Congregation in England: And he ask'd me particularly, What was done at the Congregation in England?
Did Oates ask that queſtion?
Yes, my Lord, he did.
Whom did he ask it of?
Of me.
When was that?
I think it was about the time of the Congregation.
How came he to enquire after it?
I was talking with him, and ſaid he to me, Know you nothing what the buſineſs is that they are to do at the Congregation? Said I, Mr. Lucy, I know not what they do; I think not much: for I hear at thoſe Meetings many times they ſtay an hour or two, and have done when they have choſen their Procurator.
And you believe he was there all the time?
Yes, my Lord, I do believe it.
Pray my Lord let me ask him a queſtion or two.
Ay, what you will.
What Religion is this Gentleman of?
I am a Catholick.
A Roman Catholick you mean, I ſuppoſe.
Yes, I always underſtood it ſo, Mr. Oates.
My Lord, I deſire to know how he came not to be produc'd at the Jeſuits Tryal, to give this Evidence he gives now.
I can give a very good reaſon perhaps: I was then, my Lord, in Germany.
That's reaſon good enough of all conſcience.
That was a new queſtion, and you have a ſatisfactory anſwer, I think.
Swear Mr. John Copley,
Were you at St. Omers in 77 and 78?
Yes, I was.
Was Oates there then?
I ſaw him all the time he was there.
When did he come thither?
He came a little before Chriſtmas, to the beſt of my remembrance.
When went he away?
In 78.
In what month in 78?
In June 78.
Was he abſent any part of that time?
I was there, and he was there too.
Was he abſent any part of the time from Christmas to June?
Nay, I am ſure he was there all the time, except that night that he was abſent at Watton, and that was in January.
Pray my Lord ask him what Religion he is of.
Does your Lordſhip ask me that queſtion?
Yes, I do ask you, Mr. Oates would know it.
I am a Roman Catholick, my Lord.
Swear Mr. Cook,
Did you know Mr. Oates at St. Omers, and when?
He came there a little before Chriſtmas 77.
How came you to know him there?
I liv'd in the Houſe then.
Was he there all April and May?
Yes, he was till the latter-end of June.
Did you ſee him every day?
Yes, I did.
Can you tell any particular time?
I am poſitive he was the 30th. of April.
What ſtile?
New ſtile.
How do you know he was there then?
It is a remarkable time; there is a Proceſſion that they keep there on that day from the Sodality to the Church, and I ſaw him go among the reſt at the latter-end among the Rhetoricians.
What ſay you, was he there on that day Mr. Hildeſley went away?
I do not remember that.
Do you remember Burnaby?
I was there when Mr. Burnaby went away.
But when he came was Oates there?
I cannot ſpeak particularly to that.
What was your place in the Colledg?
My Lord, he is a Lay-man be ſure.
I was a Servant in the Houſe.
In what place do you ſerve?
I was a Tayler.
I do not remember him.
But I remember you.
Swear Jo. Wright Eſq
Do you remember Oates at St. Omers?
Yes, I do.
When was it?
The Winter before the notice of the Plot was.
What year was it in?
In the year 77.
What month in that year did he come thither?
I cannot tell, it was Winter-time.
When did he go away?
He went away in Summer, I cannot tell juſt the time.
Was he abſent at any time, from his coming in Winter, to his going away in Summer.
The Scholars ſaid he was once at a place call'd Watton.
Come, this ſays nothing to the purpoſe.
My Lord, we leave it here.
What ſay you to it then Mr. Oates?
Has Mr. Attorney done?
Yes, we have done for the preſent.
Then are you to make your defence.
My Lord, Here is an Indictment brought againſt me for Perjury; and this Indictment ſets forth, That I ſhould upon the 17th. of December appear at the Old-Bailey, and there ſwear, That there was a Treaſonable Conſult of the Jeſuits met at the White-horſe-Tavern in the Strand, and that this Treaſonable Conſult did divide it ſelf into leſſer Companies and Meetings, and that I carried about a certain Reſolution, which the Jeſuits came to, concerning killing the King, from Chamber to Chamber to be ſign'd. My Lord, I have a great exception to make to this Indictment, and that is, my Lord, as to the form ▪ For, by your Lordſhips favour, I think the Perjury is not well aſſign'd, and according as I am adviſed I offer this to your Lordſhips conſideration. It ſays in the aſſignment of the Perjury, Ubi revera & in facto praedictus Titus Otes non praeſens fuit ad aliquam Conſultationem Jeſuitarum apud le White-horſe-Tavern praedict in le Strand in Com Midd 'praedict' ſuper viceſimum quartum diem April 'anno Dom' Milliceſimo.
How Milliceſimo!
My Lord, it is Law-Latine, I ſuppoſe it may ſerve in a Court.
No, it is true Latine there:
I cannot tell how to read it better.
I do believe that.
It is written in ſuch a hand, I cannot read it; but the ſubſtance of it is, it ſays here, That I did not carry any Reſolution from Chamber to Chamber ſignand '. Now, the Evidence charged upon me to be given, is, That I did not ſee it ſignat': So that the aſſignment of the Perjury does not purſue the Oath as it is ſet forth; for if it be ſignat 'in the Evidence that was given, it ought to be ſignat' in the Perjury that is aſſigned; and I humbly crave the Opinion of your Lordſhip and the Court upon this point.
Look you, Mr. Oates, That you offer'd before, and I gave this Anſwer, which I muſt now repeat, That now we are upon the Fact, and this exception will be ſav'd to you for its proper time, if you be convicted. It is not proper now; but ſuppoſe there were that thing which you ſay is an Objection, yet you muſt know that there are Two Perjuries that are aſſign'd; the One is upon the firſt part of your Oath, which was, That you were preſent at a Conſult of the Jeſuits the 24th. of April 78. at the White-horſe-Tavern in the Strand, Ubi revera you were not there. Now, Do you admit in the firſt place, that you were forſworn in that particular.
No, my Lord, I do not.
If the Jury find that you were forſworn in that firſt point, that you were not there, it will be eaſily believed you ſwore falſe in the other point, that you did not carry the Reſolution from Chamber to Chamber.
But, my Lord, it is not well aſſign'd, I think.
That will be ſav'd to you after the Verdict, I tell you, if there be occaſion for it.
My Lord, I ſuppoſe the Proof ought to be according to the Record, and the Record makes the Perjury differ from the Oath.
I tell you that is to the form, and that will be ſav'd to you after the Verdict one way or the other.
Then will your Lordſhip be pleaſed to conſider there was a Record brought in, which is almoſt the ſame with that I am to offer to be read on my behalf, and which is the firſt Proof that I have to offer of the Conſult that was held in London in April 78. And I deſire Mr. Percivile may be called, I forget his Chriſtian-name, and Mr. Vaughan who is my Sollicitor: But pray, my Lord, let me firſt have the Opinion of the Court, whether they did prove the words that I am ſaid to ſwear as they are laid in the Indictment.
Yes, very fully, we think ſo; but the Jury are to try that, that is a point of Fact: but if you will, you ſhall have our thoughts about it; We think they are fully proved.
Here is Mr. Percivile.
Pray ſwear him,
What do you ask him?
Mr. Percivile, you examin'd the Conviction of Mr. Ireland, pray put it in: Is it a true Copy?
Yes, it is.
My Lord, I deſire that the Conviction and Attainder of Mr. Ireland may be read.
It has been read already.
My Lord, I will not take up the Courts time any more than is neceſſary for my Defence.
Nay; do as you will, as long as you offer things pertinent and decent, the Court will hear you with all patience, and you may take what time is neceſſary for you.
I thank your Lordſhip: I deſign'd nothing at all of reflection upon the Court, but a reflection on the Witneſſes that came in againſt me.
This is a Copy of the ſame Record that was before read.
Well, if that be allowed for Evidence for me, I am contented to ſpare the time of the Court, not to read it again: but, my Lord, I offer this, and deſire to have Councel aſſign'd me to argue this point in Law; that is, Whether or no the Convictions and Attainders of Ireland, Whitebread, and the reſt of them, of a Treaſonable Conſult of the 24th. of April 78. where it was reſolv'd to murder the late King, ought not to be taken as a ſufficient Legal Proof of the Fact, ſo long as thoſe Attainders remain of force? and whether the averment of that being falſe, is to be received againſt thoſe Records.
There is no difficulty in that at all in the world, Mr. Oates.
My Lord, I do not know the Law, and therefore I pray I may have Councel aſſign'd to argue that point.
There is no queſtion in it. God forbid, if a Verdict be obtain'd by Perjury, that that Verdict ſhould protect the perjur'd party from being proſecuted for his falſe Oath. There were no Juſtice in that; nor is it an averment againſt a Record, for this is not a Writ of Error in fact that will reverſe it, but the Record remains a good Record and unimpeached ſtill: But though it be a good Record, yet it is lawful to ſay this Verdict was obtain'd upon the Teſtimony of ſuch an one, that forſwore himſelf in that Teſtimony, and for that particular Perjury he may ſurely be proſecuted.
Is not that Attainder an uncontroulable Evidence of the Fact, 'till it be revers'd?
Yes, it is againſt the party attainted; but if that Attainder was founded upon a Verdict that was obtain'd by Perjury, God forbid, but he ſhould be told ſo that did perjure himſelf.
Well, my Lord, if your Lordſhip rules that for Law, then I will go on; and I muſt now obſerve to the Jury in the opening the Evidence two things. Firſt, That the Indictment upon which Ireland was try'd, was found the 16th. of December 78, and on the 17th. of December, the next day, Ireland was try'd at the Old-Bailey; and then I find this Indictment brought againſt me for Perjury, is found at the Old-Bailey ſix years after the Fact by ſpecial Commiſſion. Now, I ſubmit it to your Lordſhips and the Juries conſideration, why the Preſentment and the finding of this Bill for Perjury has been ſo long delay'd, ſince it appears by the Evidence, that the Witneſſes that have been produc'd to prove the Perjury, were either at the Trial of the Five Jeſuits, or might have been produced then; and though they are not all the ſame perſons, yet they all bear the ſame Teſtimony that was then offered, but were not credited; and I hope when my Evidence is heard, they will have the ſame Reputation with this Jury that they had with thoſe others. My Lord, I muſt acquaint your Lordſhip and this Court, That in this Indictment for which Mr. Ireland was convicted, Mr. Whitebread and Mr. Fenwick did undergo part of the Tryal, and did hear the whole body of the Evidence that the Witneſſes teſtified againſt them; but there being but one Witneſs againſt them two at that time, which was my ſelf, (Mr. Bedloe being then upon an Intrigue, as your Lordſhip may remember) my Lord Chief Juſtice Scroggs, who was then the mouth of the Court, did diſcharge the Jury of Mr. Whitebread and Mr. Fenwick, and remanded them to Priſon, which Mr. Whitebread ſix months after did remark to the Court, and urg'd it as a Plea for himſelf to be diſcharg'd: but that being over-rul'd by the Court, he was try'd. Now,38 he had ſix months time to provide himſelf with new freſh Evidence to aſperſe me, and to endeavour to falſifie that Teſtimony I gave in againſt Whitebread and Fenwick, when Ireland was try'd, and ſo he knew what it was. I muſt further obſerve to you, my Lord, and Gentlemen of the Jury, That my Caſe is very hard, that ſince the ſubſtance of my Teſtimony was with credit receiv'd, and the Jury upon convicting them were acquainted,That they had found an unexceptionable Verdict; That all the Objections againſt the Evidence were then fully anſwer'd; That there was nothing that the Priſoners had been wanting in to object, which could be objected; and that the thing was as clear as the Sun.And yet, after ſix years time, I muſt come to be called to an account for Perjury in my Teſtimony of that part of the Popiſh Plot, with which the King and Kingdom, four ſucceſſive Parliaments, all the Judges of the Land, and three Juries, were ſo well ſatisfied. I ſhall therefore offer to your Lordſhip and the Juries conſideration the unanimous Votes of three Houſes of Commons; I ſhall offer the Proceedings of the Houſe of Lords, that is the higheſt Judicature in the Kingdom; I ſhall prove what I have open'd by the Teſtimony of ſeveral Noblemen that are here, who will teſtifie this for me. My Lord, I ſhall prove, that ſeveral attempts have been made to baffle this Teſtimony, as that of the Murther of Sir Edmundbury Godfrey, who took my Depoſitions, the Contrivance of Paine, Farewell, and Thompſon, made in the year 81 or 82, I forget which; I ſhall then produce Evidence that I was actually here in Town at the time in queſtion; and then upon the whole I ſhall ſubmit it to your Lordſhip and the Jury. But to prepare your Lordſhip and the Jury the better for my Evidence, I would again urge the ſtrangeneſs of this Proſecution, and the hardſhip that is put upon me, to be tryed for Perjury in an Evidence given ſix years ago, and formerly very induſtriouſly, though not ſuccesfully, endeavoured to be falſified by ſixteen St. Omers Youths that were produced and examined before all the Judges in the Kingdom, and that not only once at Whitebread's Trial, but a ſecond time at Langhorn's Trial, in neither of which would the Jury believe them, becauſe of their Religion and Education, and the perſons under whom they were educated, who were men of known Artifice. Then, my Lord, I would this argue: If that time my Evidence were true, it muſt be true ſtill; for Truth is always the ſame; and if it were then true, and I can prove it to be true, 'twill be thought a hard thing without all doubt, that this ſhould be put upon me. Then, my Lord, I would fain know from my Proſecutors, Why this Indictment of Perjury has been deferred ſo long? Why theſe Witneſſes that come now to teſtifie this matter, and could then have been brought, did not come before, to juſtifie at the Trials of theſe perſons what they now ſay, which might have ſav'd their Lives, if true, and had been credited. Then I ſhall offer to your Lordſhip what I deſire You and the Jury would pleaſe to obſerve, That though the King's Councel are now againſt me, yet they are alſo againſt themſelves, for they were of Councel for the King in thoſe Caſes: particularly Mr. Sollicitor at Langhorn's Trial, Sir Robert Sawyer at Sir George Wakeman's Trial: They were of Councel before for the truth of my Teſtimony; they are now againſt it: I only mention that, and paſs it over. But this is not the firſt attempt that has been made to diſcredit the Teſtimony of the Popiſh Plot, as I told you before. Now, can it be ſuppoſed that the love and deſire of publick Juſtice can be the cauſe of this attempt to falſifie my Evidence after ſo many Trials, in which it has been credited and confirmed? Can any thing, my Lord, more plainly tend to deſtroy and ſubvert the methods of Juſtice, to frighten all Witneſſes from henceforth from ever appearing to diſcover any Conſpiracies? and does it not tend to expoſe and vilifie the known Underſtanding and Juſtice of the late King of ever Bleſſed Memory, to arraign the Wiſdom of His Privy-Council, His Great and Noble Peers, His Loyal Commons in three ſucceſſive Parliaments, His Twelve Judges, and all thoſe ſeveral Juries that were upon thoſe Trials? Had not thoſe Juries ſenſe? had they not honeſty? had they no conſciences? And the Judges before whom thoſe Conſpirators were try'd, were they men of no Juſtice, nor Honour, nor Integrity, nor Conſcience, nor Underſtanding? Shall thoſe Juries be ſaid to have drawn the innocent Blood of theſe men upon their own Heads and the Nation? as, if I were perjur'd, it muſt be innocent Blood that was ſhed upon it.
No, no, that goes a great deal too far, Mr. Oates: The Jury have no ſhare, nor the Judges neither, in that Blood which was ſhed by your Oath.
No, That is your own moſt certainly, and not theirs.
But this, I ſay, makes it moſt plain: The Evidence was then true, and I hope I ſhall make it as evidently plain 'tis as true now; and I do not queſtion, but upon the Evidence I ſhall now give, both Poſitive and Collateral, the Jury will believe me, and acquit me of this foul Accuſation. Pray my Lord be pleaſed to conſider, that when the Jury brought in Ireland guilty of the High-Treaſon of which he was accuſed and convicted him, Pickering, and Grove; ſays my Lord Chief Juſtice Scroggs (that then was) to them,Gentlemen, you have done like very good Subjects, and very good Chriſtians, that is, like very good Proteſtants; and now much good may do them with their Thirty Thouſand Maſſes; as I ſhall prove he did ſay.Then I inſiſt, in the ſecond place, That Whitebread's Conviction does reinforce the Conviction of Ireland, becauſe of the attempt by the St. Omers Witneſſes to have overthrown my Evidence: But ſince I am attaqu'd again in the ſame kind by the violence of the Popiſh Intereſt, and by the malice of my Popiſh Adverſaries, I am contented to ſtand the Teſt with all my heart. And then, to conclude all, I ſhall ſhew the Court, That 'tis in vain for the Popiſh Party to expect and think to wipe their mouths, with Solomon's Whore, and ſay they have done no wickedneſs: No, I queſtion not but thouſands of Proteſtants in this Kingdom are fully ſatisfied and convinced of the Truth of the Popiſh Plot, all and every part of it. Now, my Lord, if you pleaſe to give me leave to proceed on in my Evidence, I ſhall beg that theſe Records of Conviction may be read, which are my firſt Proof of the Conſult; and I ſhall then bring Witneſſes, viva voce, and ſhall make it appear, that what I did ſwear at thoſe Trials was true.
Not to intetrupt you in your Defence, or the method you will take for it, I would put you upon that which is proper for you to apply your ſelf to, becauſe the queſtion now is not, Whether there was a Conſult or Congregation of the Jeſuits here upon the 24th. of April 78? but the queſtion that toucheth you is, Whether you were preſent at any ſuch Conſult here in London the 24th. of April 78? Theſe Gentlemen, ſome of them, do ſay, there was a Conſult, and others that they heard of it, and believe there was ſuch an one, becauſe it was uſual to have a Triennal Congregation for ſome particular purpoſes: But the queſtion, is, Whether you have ſufficient proof to prove your ſelf to be here on the 24th. of April 78, at which time it is agreed of all hands there was a Conſult?
But will your Lordſhip be pleaſed to take notice of the drift of the Evidence, how they are conſiſtent one with another? Theſe Gentlemen that have now been ſworn to prove that I was not at this Conſult, do attempt to prove that I was at St. Omers: Now, to anſwer this, I ſhall not go about to prove that I was not then at St. Omers, but that I was actually then, and about that time, here in London; and then all that proof that Mr. Attorney-General has brought muſt be laid aſide.
You ſay well; prove that.
Now, my Lord, to introduce and prepare the Jury for this, it will be neceſſary, I humbly conceive, to read the Records of the Conviction of Whitebread and Ireland.
Well, go your own way. We are not to direct you: I only tell you where the queſtion lies.
Sir Samuel Aſtrey, pray be pleaſed to read them in Engliſh, that the Jury may underſtand them. Firſt read Ireland's Record,
Now read Whitebread's Record: Read but the Attainder, I will not trouble the Court with the whole Record.
Does not the Record ſay, The Jurors ſay upon their Oaths they are guilty.
Yes, I'll warrant you.
It is Dicunt ſuper ſacramentum ſuum.
Very well. Theſe, my Lord, I do produce as my firſt Evidence, to prove that there was a Trayterous Conſult held upon the 24th. of April 78, at the White-horſe-Tavern in the Strand, it having been believed and affirmed by two Verdicts. Now give me leave to offer but this to the Court, That at the Trial of Mr. Ireland I gave ſo40 full and ample a Teſtimony againſt Whitebread and Fenwick, accompanied with all the circumſtances of Time and Place, that my Lord Chief Juſtice Scroggs ſaid, The Evidence might be ſufficient to have ſatisfied a private conſcience, though it was not a legal Proof then to convict him, there being but one Witneſs againſt them: And for this I call Mr. Robert Blayney.
Pray ſwear Mr. Blayney,
What do you ask Mr. Blayney?
Mr. Blayney, have you your Notes of Ireland's Trial here?
Yes, Sir, I have.
Pray will you look into what my Lord Chief Juſtice Scroggs ſaid when he diſcharged the Jury of Whitebread and Fenwick.
Whereabouts is it, Sir, in the Printed Trial?
It is page 55.
I have found the place, what is it you would ask me about it?
Whether my Lord Chief Juſtice Scroggs did not uſe theſe words to the Jury:I do acknowledge that Mr. Oates has given a very full and ample Teſtimony, accompanied with all the circumſtances of Time and Place, againſt them all; That may go far with you, all things conſidered, to believe there is a Plot: Yet I do not think they have proved it against Whitebread and Fenwick by Two Witneſſes, though the Teſtimony be ſo full as to ſatisfie a private conſcience, yet we muſt go according to Law too. It will be convenient from what is already proved, to have them ſtay till more proof come in; 'Tis a great Evidence that is againſt them, but it not being ſufficient in point of Law. We diſcharge you of them. It is not a legal Proof to convict them by, whatſoever it may be to ſatisfie your conſciences.
I have look'd upon my Notes, and I cannot find exactly thoſe words.
He ſays he cannot find that paſſage as it is there.
There is ſomething to that purpoſe, my Lord.
Pray, Sir, will you look into your Notes in the very ſame place, what my Lord Chief Baron ſaid:You muſt (ſpeaking to the Jayler) understand they are no way acquitted: the Evidence is ſo full againſt them by Mr. Oates's Teſtimony, that there is no reaſon to acquit them; it is as flat as by one Witneſs can be.
There is ſuch a paſſage, I find, in my Notes.
He ſays there is ſuch a paſſage.
Then I deſire Mr. Blayney would look into his Notes, what my Lord Chief Juſtice Scroggs ſaid in his ſumming up the Evidence againſt Ireland: He mentions the Evidence of Sir Dennis Aſhburnham, who was produced to diſcredit me, and then he adds,When the matter is ſo accompanied with ſo many other circumſtances, which are material things, and cannot be evaded or deny'd, it is almost impoſſible for any man either to make ſuch a ſtory, or not to believe it when it is told. — It is Ireland's Trial, page 72.
My Lord, I do find ſuch a paſſage in my Notes.
He ſays there is ſuch a paſſage in his Notes.
Then I would ask Mr. Blaney another queſtion at the bringing in the Verdict of the Jury againſt Ireland, Pickering, and Grove, my Lord Chief Juſtice Scroggs (that then was) had this expreſſionYou have done, Gentlemen, like very good Subjects, and very good Chriſtians, that is to ſay, like very good Proteſtants; and now much good may their 30000 Maſſes do them.
Yes, my Lord, there is in my Notes ſuch an expreſſion of my L. C. J. Scroggs.
Pray you, Mr. Blayney, have you Whitebread's Trial? the Trial of the Five Jeſuits I mean.
My Lord, when I received a Subpoena from Mr. Oates to be here this day, and to bring my Notes of Ireland, Whitebread and Langhorns Trials, I did (as I did before upon another occaſion) make a ſearch for all my Notes, but could not find any but thoſe of the Trial of Ireland and Langhorn, and thoſe I have brought here, but have not Whitebread's.
He ſays he has not the Notes of Whitebread's Trial; he cannot find them.
Then I muſt deſire, my Lord, that the Printed Trials may be read.
No, they are no Evidence: If you can prove what was ſaid at any of them, you may by Witneſſes, but not by the Printed Books.
Then will your Lordſhip be pleaſed to give me leave to mention what was ſaid by your Lordſhip at that time, when you were Recorder of London, about your ſatisfaction with the Evidence?
Ay, with all my heart, and whatever I ſaid I will own, if I can remember it.
Will your Lordſhip be pleaſed to be ſworn then?
No, there will be no need for that; I will acknowledge any thing I ſaid then.
Then, if your Lordſhip pleaſes, I will read thoſe paſſages out of the Books.
Ay, do ſo.
Says Mr. Recorder of London, (in particular to that part of the Priſoners Defence, at the Trial of the Five Jeſuits, and the full ſcope given them of making Objections to the Evidence) when he gave Judgment of Death upon theſe Five Jeſuits and Langhorn, (for I now ſpeak of your Lordſhip in the third perſon) Your ſeveral Crimes have been prov'd againſt you: you have been fully heard, and stand convicted of thoſe Crimes you have been indicted for.
I believe I might ſay ſomething to the ſame purpoſe as you have read now.
I thank your Lordſhip for that acknowledgment.
Ay, I'll own any thing I did ſay.
My Lord, I have one paſſage more to urge, and that was my Lord, after the Jeſuits had been convicted, when the Jury brought in their Verdict, and found Whitebread, Fenwick, Harcourt, Gaven, and Turner guilty, your Lordſhip applying your ſelf to the Jury, ſaid thus to them;Gentlemen, you of the Jury, there has been a long Evidence given againſt the Priſoners at the Bar; they were all indicted, arraigned, and tried for High-Treaſon depending upon ſeveral circumſtances? They can none of them ſay the Court refuſed to hear any thing they could ſay for themſelves, but upon a long Evidence, and a patient hearing of the Defence they made, they are found guilty, and for any thing appears to us it is a juſt Verdict you have given.
I believe I might ſay ſomething to that purpoſe too at that time; and no doubt the Jury did (as the Caſe then ſtood) find an unexceptionable Verdict.
There is another place, my Lord, that I would inſtance in, for your Lordſhips Opinion of the Evidence of the Popiſh Plot, and that is this: Now, my Lord, I bring your Lordſhip as you were of Councel for the King at Mr. Colledge's Trial at Oxford, the 17th. of August 81: There you, my now Lord Chief Juſtice, directing your ſelf to the Jury, had this expreſſion;We come not here to trip up the heels of the Popiſh Plot, by ſaying that any of them who ſuffer'd for it did die contrary to Law; for if Mr. Dugdale was not a perſon fit to be believed, or if the reſt of the Judges who try'd Gaven were out in the Law, then that man dy'd wrongfully; for he had as much right to be try'd according to Law as any other perſon whatſoever. This was your Lordſhips Opinion of the matter then, and your Lordſhip as Councel for the King did there deliver the Law as well as Fact to the Jury. If then they went againſt Law that would go to trip up the heels of the Popiſh Plot —
We are got into an endleſs Wood of ſayings of people, I know not where and when; and when all is done, 'tis to no purpoſe.
My Lord, it is a part, and a great part of my Defence, to ſhew what credit has been given to the Evidence of the Popiſh Plot.
Ay, but what Councel ſays at the Bar, or what Judges ſay in the Court of their Opinion is no Evidence of a Fact, of which the Jury are Judges only.
My Lord, every Judge is upon his Oath, and delivers his Judgment according to his Oath.
Not as to the Fact, but only in points of Law, ſo as to tell the Jury what the Law is, if the Fact be ſo and ſo.
My Lord, it goes a great way with the Jury to have the Judges Opinion.
Mr. Oates, deceive not your ſelf; all this you have inſiſted on hitherto, has not been to the purpoſe, nor is any ſort of Evidence in this caſe; and therefore do not run away with an opinion of this as Evidence: a Judges Opinion is of value in points of Law that ariſe upon Facts found by Juries, but are no Evidence of the Fact, for Judges only do preſume the Fact to be true, as it is ſound by the Jury; and therefore42 ſay they, Out of that Fact ſo found, the point of Law ariſing is thus or thus. Then in Caſe, after a Jury has given a Verdict of the Fact, a Judges Opinion of the Fact, (which may be perhaps contrary to the Verdict) ſhould be an Evidence as to that Fact, that would be to overthrow and nullifie the Juries Verdict: No, that is not the Judges Province. Surely you would not have a Judges private Opinion, that Twelve men have found a Verdict againſt the Fact, to be an Evidence as to that Fact: No; but admit the Fact to be ſo or ſo, then the perſon convicted of the Fact ought to ſuffer ſo or ſo. And by the ſame reaſon as this, a Jury of honeſt Gentlemen here, when I tell them here is a plain Fact either to convict you or to acquit you upon this Indictment, are not bound to go by what I ſay in point of Fact, but they are to go according to their own Oaths, and according to the Evidence and Teſtimony of the Witneſſes: It is not my Opinion that is to weigh at all with them, whether you are Guilty of this Perjury, or are Innocent, but the Evidence that is given here in Court. Therefore what my Lord Chief Juſtice Scroggs ſaid at any of thoſe Trials, or what I ſaid, or any other perſon, that either was of Councel, or a Judge on the Bench, ſaid as our Opinions, is but our Opinions on the Fact as it occurred to our preſent apprehenſions, but is no Evidence nor binding to this Jury. I muſt tell you, there is no doubt but that thoſe Juries did every one of them believe the Evidence you gave, or they would not have convicted the Priſoners. Do you think they would have found a Verdict againſt their own belief, and being upon their Oaths to make true Deliverance between the King and the Priſoners, have perjured Themſelves to hang Others? If they had ſo done, they had committed Wilful Murther, and the worſt of Murthers too, being under colour of the Proceſs of Law; but yet all this is no Evidence. I do not diſcommend you for inſinuating theſe things as introductive and preparative to what Evidence you have to offer; but it is no Evidence one way or other. Alack-aday! how many times have we Cauſes here in Weſtminſter-hall, wherein we have Verdict againſt Verdict? and yet no imputation to either of the Juries, which might give different Verdicts upon different Grounds. There was a notable Caſe lately of my Lady. Ivies at this Bar: We all thought upon the firſt Trial, that ſhe had as good a Title to the Land as could be; all the Judges and the Councel went way (I believe) ſatisfied with the Juries Verdict for her: But when the Cauſe came to be heard again, we found all the Witneſſes to prove her Title, were guilty of notorious Porjury, and the ſame perſons which did believe before that ſhe was in the Right, and the Jury had done well, when they heard the ſecond Trial did believe ſhe was in the wrong, and accordingly the ſecond Jury found it ſo; and we believe that laſt Verdict to be good, without any reflection on the Credit of the Firſt Jury, becauſe the Evidence was as ſtrong on her ſide then, as it was afterwards againſt her. In theſe Caſes we give our Opinions always according to the preſent Teſtimony that is before us.
Then, my Lord, I offer this to your Conſideration, That thoſe men that were thus charged by me with High-Treaſon, were Prieſts and Jeſuits moſt of them, and particularly Mr. Ireland, in whoſe Trial I am ſaid to have committed this Perjury, and you ſhall find him to have been by others proved a Prieſt and a Jeſuit, and actually engaged in a Deſign againſt the Life of the King. If I then do prove that Ireland was engaged in a Deſign againſt the late Kings Life, and was a Prieſt and a Jeſuit, I deſire to know, Whether this be not a Collateral Evidence to render me of credit ſufficient, and ſupport my Teſtimony.
By no means upon this Indictment. It's true it may give ſome credit to your Teſtimony, but is not of it ſelf ſufficient: Nay, I'll go a great way further than that; I will ſuppoſe that there was a Conſult of the Jeſuits upon the 24th. of April 78 at the White-horſe-Tavern in the Strand, where thoſe you ſay were preſent, were all preſent, Ireland, and Whitebread, and Pickering, Grove and Fenwick, were all there, and that they did there come to a Reſolution to deſtroy the late King: Suppoſe all this to be true, and yet you all this time are not innocent of the Fact imputed to you, becauſe you ſwore directly, That You were there at that Conſult too, which you were not, if theſe men ſwear true, for then you were at St. Omers at that time; and therefore give us ſome ſort of Teſtimony to ſatisfie us that you were here,43 and then you will ſet all right again. If the Jeſuits and Prieſts did Plot, that is nothing to make your Evidence true, if you ſwore that which you did not know of your own knowledge.
Shall it be allow'd then that Ireland was a Jeſuit and a Papiſt?
If it ſhould that will be to very little purpoſe for your Turn.
There is the Evidence of a Record for it, my Lord; but if that be not ſufficient, I can call Witneſſes to prove it. Pray call Mr. Miles Prance,
He is not here.
He was ſubpoena'd, my Lord, to come hither.
I can't help it, if he will not come; but I'll tell you, for methods ſake, not to preſcribe to you, but to tell you what I think may be more for your advantage than any of theſe Inferences that you are making: If you did call two or three Witneſſes to prove that you were in Town the 22d. 23d. or 24th. of April, it would be the beſt Defence you can make, and would give the beſt anſwer to all that is objected againſt you.
I will do that (my Lord) then, and follow your directions.
Do ſo, that is the beſt way.
Cryer, call Cicilia Mayo.
Here ſhe is.
Swear her,
Well, what do you ask this Witneſs?
Pray Mrs. Mayo give my Lord and the Jury an account whether you did ſee me in London the latter-part of April or the beginning of May 78; for that is the queſtion now before the Court.
Ay, what ſay you? when did you ſee him in 78?
My Lord, I ſaw him the latter-end of April: He came to Sir Richard Barker's Houſe, where I did then live, and afterwards he came again thither within a few days. By this circumſtance I remember it; Sir Richard Barker my Maſter was ſick all the month of April, and in the Countrey, only he came now and then home for a little while, and went again: Now Mr. Oates came there when he was abſent, and a young man that lived in the Houſe came to me, and told me, There was Mr. Oates in the ſtrangeſt diſguiſe that ever was. Says he, I think he is turn'd Quaker: No, ſaid I, he is no Quaker, for they wear no Perriwigs, and I rebuk'd the young Man for ſaying ſo. As for Mr. Oates, I never ſaw his face before that time that I know of.
How do you know that to be Mr. Oates then?
The Family knew him, and they told me it was he: That is the Gentleman there. I ſpeak now nothing but that which I teſtified ſeven years ago, and it is all Truth, and nothing but the Truth.
Ay, no doubt of it, thou ſwear'ſt nothing but the Truth.
My Lord, he came three or four days afterwards again to the houſe, and then the young man came to me, and told me, That Parſon Oates was turn'd Jeſuit; and thereupon I ſaid to him, Good Lord! why doſt thou concern thy ſelf with him? canſt not let him alone? I lookt upon him, and ſaw him at that time: And when he came that time, he went to Sir Richard's Ladies Siſter, who is now in Wales, and coming to her, ſaid ſhe, Mr. Oates, I hear you are turn'd Jeſuit, and we can have no Society with you now: At laſt, he ſtay'd to Dinner with them, and ſtay'd moſt of the day there. Then he comes the latter-end of May; Whitſuntide was in May that year, and I know he came before Whitſuntide by this token; I ſpeak of the ſecond time of his coming: Our Cuſtom in the houſe was to Waſh and Scowr before the time, and I was ſending for a Woman to come and help to Waſh and Scowr, and then he was walking in the Garden, and the young man came and told me Oates was there: he came into the Pantry to me, Look, ſaid he, he is come again, and he is turn'd Jeſuit by his diſguiſe: Why Benjamin, ſaid I, what haſt thou to do with the man? canſt not let him alone?
What was the Name of that young Man you ſpeak of?
Truly, my Lord, he is dead, or he would have teſtified the ſame thing.
But what was his Name?
Benjamin; I can't tell his other Name.
Well, go on.
Said I to him, Why doſt thou ſcorn this man? Prithee get out of the Room, I am not able to hear it: So he walk'd the ſpace of an hour in the Garden.
Is Sir Richard Barker living?
Yes, my Lord, he is, but he is not well.
Was he at home when Oates was there?
No, my Lord, I think not.
Who din'd with him, do you ſay, when he din'd there?
My Ladies Siſter.
What is her Name?
Madam Thurrel.
And who elſe?
And her Sons.
Where are they?
They are both dead.
And who elſe was there?
One Doctor Cocket.
Where is he?
He is in Wales too, my Lord.
'Tis a great misfortune to have ſo many dead, or ſo far remote.
My Lord, ſix years time makes a great alteration in a Family.
Was there any body elſe there?
There were two of the Daughters, and they could all come and teſtifie the ſame thing.
Where are they, and what is become of them? why are they not here?
They are living in Lincolnſhire, my Lord, I think.
What elſe have you more to ſay?
Pray Mrs. Mayo let me ask you a queſtion: What colour'd Cloaths had he on when you faw him firſt?
He had a whitiſh Hat, and colour'd Cloaths.
What time of the day was it you ſaw him?
In the morning.
Did he go publickly?
Yes, he went publickly.
Did he come often to the houſe?
He was there frequently, my Lord.
Then it ſeems he was ſo diſguis'd, that he could walk publickly in the ſtreets of London at Noon-day, and was frequently in the Family.
Yes, my Lord.
Now tell me who was in the Family.
Mrs. Mayo, —
Pray give me leave to ask her the queſtion: Who was there at that time?
Sir Richard Barker's Ladies Siſter, Madam Thurrel, and his two Daughters, and two of his Kinſmen, and two of the Servants, one is here a Witneſs now.
Who is that that is a Witneſs now?
One that belongs to Sir Richard Barker, and the other is now dead, & thoſe two Kinſmen are dead.
What is become of the two Daughters, ſay you?
They are in Lincolnſhire, as I take it, my Lord.
When did you hear from them?
My Lord, it is half a year ago almoſt ſince Mr. Oates had notice of this Trial.
Where is Sir Richard Barker himſelf?
I was with Sir Richard Barker, and he purpoſed to have come hither; but being a crazy man, and ancient, it ſeems he could not, and deſir'd to be excus'd, for he had a bad night, and was not well; but he deſired that the Court ſhould know, if he were well he would be there.
Were you ſworn at a former Trial about this matter, Mrs. Mayo?
Yes, Sir, I was.
Do you remember what you ſwore then?
The ſame I do now.
Then I ask you this queſtion, How long before Whitſuntide was it that you ſaw Mr. Oates at Sir Richard Barker's?
A pretty while before, twice.
Mrs Mayo, I'll put you a fair queſtion, Whether or no it might not be a fortnight before Whitſuntide you think?
The laſt time I ſaw you was a week before Whitſuntide.
How can you tell it was but a week?
'Twas but a week, becauſe at that time I had ſent the Boy for the Woman to ſcowr and waſh there.
Was that the laſt time you ſaw him?
Yes: I ſaw him ſeveral times before, and it was all before Whitſuntide.
How long before that was the firſt time that you ſaw him?
He would be away for three or four days, and come again.
But how long before the laſt time was the firſt time you ſaw him.
He came ſtill to and again.
When was the time that you ſaw him next before the week before Whitſuntide, which, as you ſay, was the laſt time you ſaw him?
I am not able to ſay that.
Did you believe it was within the compaſs of a week before?
To the beſt of my remembrance it was.
When was the firſt time you ſaw him?
'Twas in the beginning of May.
You ſaid at firſt it was the latter-end of April.
Pray, my Lord, let me a little think; I am unwilling to be miſtaken, I would ſay nothing but the Truth.
No, I would not have thee; but for Gods ſake let us have the Truth, that is that we look for.
I ſay the Coach-man ſaw him there as well as I, and he can tell you better than I.
But I ask you this queſtion poſitively, Was it in May or April?
To the beſt of my remembrance it was the beginning of May:
Was it within a week of May?
I believe it was, I cannot tell exactly to a day.
Was it ſo or not?
I cannot be poſitive to a day; it is now ſix years time ſince I was firſt examin'd about it.
But you can remember what you ſwore then, can't you?
I declare it I ſpeak not a ſyllable but I will aver to be true before the great God:
Can you ſwear it was within the firſt ſeven days of May?
You ſee, Mr. Sollicitor, ſhe ſays ſhe cannot,
Did not you ſay at that Trial, that you did never ſee his face till a week before Whitſuntide, or a little after?
I did ſwear the ſame that I do now, to the beſt of my remembrance, & that is the Truth,
But did you not ſwear ſo?
I never ſaw him before that firſt time he came to Sir Richard Barker's, and after the laſt time that he came I ſaw him not till after the Plot was diſcovered,
How long was that after he had been at your Maſters horſe?
It was a good while, I cannot tell how long.
Was it within a month or two months?
It was more, my Lord.
Where was Sir Richard Barker at that time?
He was at Putney.
Then he did not ſee him?
Not then he did not
Did he afterwards?
Yes, he did ſee him afterwards.
How long afterwards was it?
I can't tell how long afterwards it was my Lord.
About what time was it?
After the Plot was diſcovered he was up and down in the Family.
You never knew Mr. Oates before that time he came in a Diſguiſe, and you did not know him then, but as they told you it was he?
No, I did not, but as they told me then; and this is the man, I'll ſwear it.
Call John Butler.
Here is John Butler.
Swear him,
My Lord, if you pleaſe I will propoſe my queſtions to your Lordſhip; and my firſt queſtion is this, I pray your Lordſhip would ask him, Whether he gave in any Evidence at the Five Jeſuits Trial, or Langhorn's Trial, about my being in Town in April or May 78?
Did you give any Evidence at the Five Jeſuits Trial?
Yes, I did.
Did you give any Evidence at Langhorn's Trial?
Yes, my Lord, I was a Witneſs there.
My Lord, it is ſo long ago, that ignorant people that come innocently without deſign, may not be ſo ready in their remembrance, as thoſe that conn'd their Leſton for ſo long time together.
Well, well; what do you ask him next, Whether he will ſtand by that Evidence he gave then?
That is all I have to ſay, my Lord: I did teſtifie the Truth then, and will abide by it.
But he muſt give the ſame over again here, or it will ſignifie nothing.
My Lord, it is now ſix years ſince, and this queſtion was not thought to be ſtirr'd ſo long after: Therefore I beg ſo much favour, that the Evidence he did give at Mr. Langhorn's Trial may be read to him.
O by no means.
My Lord, it is ſuch a diſtance of time —
Look ye, if he has any Notes himſelf, he may look on them to refreſh him.
My Lord, he comes raw hither, without any inſtruction at all.
So ſhould every Witneſs: God forbid we ſhould countenance the inſtructing of Witneſſes what they ſhould ſwear.
I beg your pardon, my Lord, I did hope this favour might be granted: I will then ask him ſome queſtions.
Ay, ay, do, refreſh his memory by queſtions as much as you can. Come, I'll ask him ſome queſtions for you; Do you remember you ſaw Mr. Oates at any time in the year 78?
If it pleaſe your Lordſhip, as near as I can remember I ſaw him in May before the Plot was diſcovered.
That was the year 78.
I am ſure I did ſee him about that time.
Where did you ſee him?
I was a Servant to Sir Richard Barker, and Mr. Oates I had been acquainted with before he went to Sea; he us'd to come to my Maſters houſe frequently, and divers times he din'd at the Table, and I waited upon my Maſter there.
When was that he din'd there at the Table?
A year before that time, in May that I ſpoke of before: It was before he went to Sea.
When did you ſee him again?
After he came from Sea, I ſaw him at my Maſters houſe.
When was it that he went to Sea?
It was a year or two before the May that I ſaw him diſguis'd coming to my Maſters houſe.
Ay, what diſguiſe did he come in?
His hair was cut off, cloſe cropt to his ears, and an old white Hat over his head, and a ſhort gray Coat over like a Horſe mans Coat.
How came you to take ſuch notice of him at that time, as to be able to ſwear when this was?
I was call'd preſently after for a Witneſs.
How long after this was it, that you were call'd to be a Witneſs?
It was when the Trials were at the Old Bailey.
Was this the firſt time you had recollected theſe circumſtances?
Yes, my Lord, that was the firſt time.
Then how came you a year and a halfs time afterwards to remember the preciſe month of May, when you did not know you ſhould be call'd to queſtion about it, and yet you cannot remember the time particularly when Oates went to Sea, but take the compaſs of a year or two?
I gueſs it was a year before, I cannot exactly tell.
When you can but gueſs at the time of ſuch a remarkable paſſage within the compaſs of a year or two, how can you pitch upon the very month for ſuch a thing as this is a year and halfs time after?
No, my Lord, it was not ſo long as a year and a half.
Pray Sir have patience.
My Lord, the Records ſhew that Ireland's Trial was the 17th. of December 78, and the Five Jeſuits Trial was the 15th. of June 79.
Then it is a full twelve months time and more from the May that he ſays he ſaw you at Sir Richard Barker's, to Whitebread's Tryal, in which he was examin'd the firſt time. Now that which I deſire of him is, to give me a reaſon why he remembers it was in the May was twelve-month before.
My Lord, The Lady whom I did ſerve, dy'd in February before, that year:
But give me ſome reaſon of your remembrance ſo long after.
My Lord, I do as well as I can.
Well, what is it?
My Lady was buried in February, and he comes into the Yard where I was cleaning my Coach, in May following that February, which was May before the Diſcovery of the Plot. He ask'd me what alteration was in the Family? I told him my Lady was dead, and the Eſcutcheon was over the door for her. He ask'd for Doctor Tongue when he came firſt in the houſe.
Why ſhould he ask for Doctor Tongue?
My Lord, Doctor Tongue lodg'd there and he did ask for him: I come to juſtifie the Truth; upon my Salvation what I ſay is true.
Well, when he ask'd whether Doctor Tongue was within, what ſaid you?
I told him no, but he went into the Room where Doctor Tongue us'd to lie, but found him not there: So he went out again; that was the ſame time Mrs. Mayo ſaw him.
But, Friend, prethee mind what I ask thee, becauſe thou muſt give me ſatisfaction how thou com'ſt to remember this, ſo as to be able to ſwear it; for his going to ask for Tongue, or the Eſcutcheon being over the door, neither of thoſe can be a reaſon for you to remember that this was in May, for the Eſcutcheon may be up in June, or in July, or in Auguſt, or in any other month after the time you ſpeak of: But how came you to take notice of this buſineſs that it was in May?
Sir Richard Barker my Maſter was then ſick at Putney, which was in May, though I cannot ſpeak to a day or a week particularly.
Then prethee let me ask thee this queſtion, How long had your Maſter been ſick before that?
He had never been well ſince my Lady dy'd.
When was it that your Lady dy'd?
In February before.
How long after that did your Maſter Sir Richard Barker continue ſick?
Half a year, I believe.
Why then, ſuppoſe your Maſter fell ſick immediately after your Lady died, and he continued ſick half a year after, yet all this while Oates might come during his ſickneſs even in the month of June or July, when 'tis acknowledg'd he was in Town, and not be here in February, which is teſtified by a great many Witneſſes.
My Lord, I tell your Lordſhip the Truth, it was in May.
But how doſt thou come to take notice it was in the month of May, ſo as to be able to ſwear it?
My Lord, I tell your Lordſhip my Lady was dead, and the Eſcutcheon was over the door.
So it might be, tho' he came in June or July, I tell ye.
My Maſter was ſick at Putney at that time.
How long did he lie ſick at Putney?
He was ſick there a fortnight, my Lord.
Then prethee when did thy Maſter go to Putney?
I cannot tell to a day.
In what month was it that he went?
It was the latter-end of April, my Lord, as I remember.
How long continu'd he ſick at Putney?
The matter of a fortnight.
Was not your Maſter ſick when your Lady dy'd at Putney?
No, he was not there then.
When did he go to Putney, ſay ye?
He went not thither till the latter-end of April, my Lord.
And did he continue at Putney but a fortnight.
Not at a time, but he continu'd going and coming a quarter of a year.
But this was the firſt time of his going, was it:
Yes, as I do remember.
My Lord, he is my Witneſs, and I deſire I may examine him.
Hold there, Mr. Oates; he is mine too: all the Witneſſes are mine to ſatisfie me in the truth of the Fact.
And to ſatisfie the Jury too, my Lord.
Yes, and to ſatisfie the Jury too; but I muſt and will ſift out the truth, for both our ſatisfactions.
My Lord, it is now, come the next month, ſix years ago ſince the Evidence of this matter was firſt given by theſe Witneſſes.
Then, Mr. Oates, I'll come a little rounder to you, and I'll put you into a certain way of clearing this buſineſs. I'll tell you what you ſhall do; You had a Lodging in Town, as well as Diet, and as well as you did eat at Doctor Barker's ſometimes, ſo you eat and lay ſometimes elſewhere. You were here in Town a great while together, if your own aſſertions be true; for you were from April till June in Town. Now come and give us account by ſome Witneſſes, if you can, where did you lodge at that time, and where did you diet? for it ſeems you had but one meal at Sir Richard Barker's.
Is that the queſtion, Sir, here in hand.
Ay indeed is it, and the main one too.
I beg your Lordſhips pardon if I miſtake, but I think that is not now in queſtion; for theſe St. Omers men do ſwear, That I was all April and May at St. Omers: Then if I do prove that in April and May I was not at St. Omers, but here in London, it is argument good enough againſt them that their Evidence is falſe. And indeed, can your Lordſhip or the Jury expect that I being then engag'd among & for the Papiſts, & afterwards an Evidence againſt them to diſcover their Treaſons, can bring any of them to teſtifie for me now? No, they will as certainly forſwear themſelves, as theſe young Fellows have all done.
Let me ask you a ſhorter queſtion; Did you always lie in a Papiſt houſe, all the two months you ſay you were here.
My Lord, I lay at ſeveral houſes.
Tell me the names of thoſe houſes, or any of them.
It is not to the point in queſtion here, my Lord.
Yes it is very much; But I perceive it is a Secret, and let any body judge why.
My Lord, They that have by the principles of their Religion, Liberty, to affirm or deny any thing, and can have diſpenſations for the violations of Oaths and Sacraments, certainly are not to be admitted as witneſſes in ſuch a caſe as this.
Talk not to me of Diſpenſations and I know not what; I ſpeak from a plain demonſtrative Proof: can it be believed that you ſhould be here in England ſo long, and as they ſay, publickly, and no perſon living ſee you that we can hear of, but an Old Woman that never ſaw you, nor knew you before, and a Coachman that tells a wild ſtory without reaſon: if you will not tell me where you lay, can you tell me where you did eat all that time.
I can tell where I did lye that time.
Do ſo then. Let us hear it, that will be your beſt defence.
Is that the point My Lord, in queſtion.
Ay upon my word is it the main point in this Caſe.
If it ſhould go upon that foot my Lord, it is impoſſible for me now to prove it; for 'tis well known I lay ſometimes with Mr. Whitebread, and ſometimes with Mr. Mico, neither of which can I have to teſtify for me; and beſides, I muſt inſiſt upon it, theſe things were in queſtion at Whitebreads Trial, nor do I believe that Mr. Whitebread, if askt at his death, would have juſtified, and ſtood by it, that I was not here then.
Well, This I muſt certainly ſay, I cannot help it, but it will ſtick with me till better anſwered. I can never be ſatisfied, that if you were here ſo long, there ſhould no better evidence be produc'd to prove you here.
My Lord, nor can I help your diſſatisfaction, but I am to ſatisfy all that hear me this day, that it is a very hard Caſe that is put upon me; I have taken the moſt effectual courſe that I could, to provide for Evidence to make my defence, and I think, by your Lordſhips good leave, thoſe that I have produc'd, do prove me here in Town in April and May 78. And if your Lordſhip has done with this Witneſs, I'le call another.
Well, go on as you will. I tell you what ſticks with me.
Pray call Mr. Philip Page.
Hold Sir a little, I would ask theſe Witneſſes a few Queſtions before they go away. You Butler, let me ask you, pray, the firſt time you ſaw Mr. Oates at the time you ſpeak of, was it in April or May?
He ſwore it was the beginning of May.
To the beſt of my knowledge, it was the beginning of May.
Who did you tell firſt, that there was Mr. Oates at that time?
I told it Mrs. Mayo.
Conſider Friend, what you ſay now, you are upon your Oath, and conſider what you ſaid at the former Trial, when you were upon your Oath too.
Pray, My Lord, I deſire my Witneſſes may be Examined without Threatnings.
It is not a Threatning, it is an Admonition not to go beyond the Truth.
Be ſure you be in the Right in what you ſay, and now I ask you upon your Oath, when was the firſt time you ſaw Mr. Oates when he came in that diſguiſe you ſpeak of?
I told you it was in May Sir.
How far in May, conſider well what you ſay.
To the beſt of my remembrance, it was the beginning of May.
Do you think it was within a Week, or the Firſt Ten days of May?
I cannot tell that, as well as I remember, it was the beginning of May.
When you ſaw him firſt in May, who elſe, as you remember, was by?
Mrs. Mayo.
And no body elſe?
Yes, One Benjamin Turbet, who is ſince dead.
But conſider your Oath Friend, once more, and recollect your ſelf, do you ſwear poſitively Mrs. Mayo was by, and did ſee him at the ſame time?
I ſee her look out of the Window into the Yard, and I believe ſhe did ſee him.
Well then, let us examine her Evidence and yours together, and ſee how they agree.
My Lord, theſe are not queſtions tending to ſatisfy the Jury at all, as to the point in queſtion.
Are they not, methinks they are, whatſoever you think.
After Six years time, to ask ſuch poor ignorant people ſuch trifling queſtions!
Pray Sir be contented, and let the Kings Council examine the Witneſſes.
My Lord, he ſays I was here in May, that's enough.
Well Sir, I know what he ſays.
And you ſhall hear Mr. Oates, how your Witneſſes agree.
Go on Mr. Sollicitor, and do you ſit ſtill and be quiet.
Then my Lord, I would ask him this queſtion more, the firſt time you ſaw Oates come to Sir Richard Barkers, what habit pray you was he in?
He was in a diſguiſe.
Ay, what diſguiſe?
He had a White Hat flapping over his Ears, his Hair cut ſhort, cloſe to his Ears, and a grey ſhort Coat.
Had he never a Periwig on?
No, his Hair was cut ſhort to his Ears.
Was he in ſuch a diſguiſe, that a Man might not ordinarily know him, that had known him before?
Truly my Lord, I did not know him when he firſt came in, till he ſpoke to me, and asked me, how do you John; and then I recollected who he was, that it was Mr. Oates.
Was he always in the ſame Habit, when he came thither?
The next time he came, he had a Cinnamon coloured Suit, and a long black Periwig that was curl'd down thus far, and a black Hat with a green Ribbon and green Cuff-ſtrings about his Wriſts.
Did you ever ſee Oates dine there?
Yes I did.
When was that?
After my Maſter came home from Putney.
Who was there beſides?
One Sir William Thurrell and Madam Thurrell.
How often did he dine there?
Several times.
Who elſe was there?
My Maſter and his Daughter.
And who elſe.
Mrs. Mayo.
What is become of your Maſters Daughter?
I beg your pardon for that my Lord.
Where is ſhe Man?
She is at home I ſuppoſe.
What doſt thou beg my pardon for then?
My Lord, I call to mind ſhe did not dine with them.
Did ſhe dine at any time with him there?
Yes, I remember ſeveral times, but not then.
When did you ſee your Maſters Daughter laſt?
I have not ſeen her this Quarter of this Year.
Where is ſhe now?
At home at Putney my Lord, I believe.
And ſhe was ſeveral times there when he din'd there.
Yes, She was at home.
Did Mrs. Mayo ſee him at Dinner there?
Yes, I believe ſhe did.
How often did he dine there about this time you ſpeak of?
Several times.
Do you think ſeven times?
I do think he might have din'd there ſeven times.
Did he more than ſeven times do you think?
I cannot number how many times it was.
Now come in Mrs. Mayo again.
Here I am my Lord.
Mrs. Mayo, give me leave to ask you a queſtion or two.
Yes my Lord what you pleaſe.
You ſay (if I do not miſ-remember; if I do, I beg your pardon, and you'l correct me) a week in May was the firſt time you ſaw Mr. Oates, and that was at Sir Richard Barkers.
I think it might be about the beginning of May.
Had he been in the Houſe before?
Not at that time that I know of, but as they told me.
Who told you?
That Coach-man there John Butler, and one Benjamin who liv'd in the Houſe.
Then you did not ſee him the firſt time he came; what ſay you Butler?
She did ſee him out of the Window in the yard.
Well let that paſs then, come I'le ask you another queſtion upon your Oath, how often have you ſeen him dine there?
I ſaw him dine that time that I ſpoke of.
Did not he dine there above once?
No he did not.
What ſay you Butler?
He did dine there ſeveral times with them.
Then one of you two muſt be miſtaken I am ſure.
My Lord, if your Lordſhip would pleaſe to give me leave to ſpeak, I would ſet it right.
Good Sir let them ſet themſelves right if they can, we need none of your Inſtructions.
My Lord, I deſire —
Why, how now; pray Sir be at quiet. Mrs. Mayo, pray what Habit had Oates when you ſaw him firſt?
He was in a grey Hat and a grey Coat.
Was his hair ſhort or long?
He had on a kind of a ſhort Wigg.
You are ſure it was a Wigg.
Yes, a kind of a brown Perriwigg.
And he ſays his hair was cut ſhort to his ears.
Theſe things are very lean ſtuff to perjure a Witneſs upon.
When he came the ſecond time what Cloaths had he on?
Afterwards he came in black Cloaths and a long Perriwig.
What coloured Perriwig was that, a black or a white one?
Not a black but a brown.
You ſay it was long.
Longer than his other, yet not very long neither.
Here are I know not how many Contradictions in theſe Witneſſes Teſtimonies.
Truly my Lord, I do not find in the Examination of the St. Omers Witneſſes, you were ſo ſtrict, or bore half ſo hard upon them, as you do upon my Witneſſes, what does it ſignifie my Lord, whether the Wigg were long or ſhort, black or brown?
We have no other way to detect Perjuries, but by theſe Circumſtances; and 'tis the duty of a Judge to enquire into all Particulars: as in a Controverſie about words, were they ſpoken in Latin or in Engliſh, and ſo to all places and poſtures of ſitting, riding, or the like; as you know the Perjury of the Elders in the caſe of Suſanna, was by their different Teſtimony in particular Circumſtances diſcovered.
My Lord, I will ask her but one ſhort queſtion, by the Oath you have taken Mrs. Mayo, to ſpeak the Truth, the whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth, as you expect the face of God with comfort in another World; did you ſee me at Sir Richard Barkers at any time in May 78. the May before the Plot was diſcovered? for that is the main queſtion.
Yes I did, and I ſpeak nothing here, but what I ſpeak as in the preſence of the Lord.
Prithee Woman doſt thou think we ask thee any thing that we think thou doſt not ſpeak in the preſence of the Lord; we are all of us in the preſence of the Lord always.
And ſhall anſwer before him for all that we have done and ſaid, all of us, the proudeſt and the greateſt here.
But I would not have ſo much to anſwer for as thou haſt in this buſineſs for all the World.
Well we have done with her now, ſhe may go away.
Where does ſhe live now?
Mrs. Mayo where do you live now?
In Leaden-hall-ſtreet my Lord.
When did you ſee Sir Richard Barker's Daughter?
About a Fortnight ago.
Where?
In Barbican in London.
Do you live with Sir Richard Barker now?
I do not live with him now.
Did his Daughter uſe to be at the Table at dinner?
She was often in the Country my Lord.
Did ſhe eat at his Table at that time when Oates was there?
I am not able to ſay whether ſhe did or not; ſhe uſed to be in Wales at Sir Thomas Middleton's ſometimes, and with Madam Thurrell her Aunt, who was her Mothers Siſter and her two Daughters.
In Wales doſt thou ſay, where?
My Lord in your own Country at one Doctor Cockets: I know your Lordſhip, though your Lordſhip does not know me.
I am very glad of it good Woman; but prithee did ever Sir Richard Barker dine with Mr. Oates?
I cannot ſay he did, he went to and fro.
Well, have you any more Witneſſes?
Cryer, call Philip Page.
Here he is Sir.
Pray ſwear him,
pray be pleaſed to give my Lord and the Jury the beſt account you can of my being in Town. But Mr. Page, the queſtion that I firſt ask you, is whether I was here in April or May, and in what year it was that you did ſee me at your Maſters Houſe?
When did you ſee Mr. Oates at your Maſter's Houſe? you mean Sir Richard Barker to be his Maſter I ſuppoſe?
Yes my Lord.
What do you ſay to it?
Truly I cannot be poſitive to the year, but to the beſt of my remembrance it was 78.
Pray tell my Lord and the Jury ſome Circumſtances in that year that did happen to you, that makes you believe it was 78.
Sir, I'le give you the beſt ſatisfaction I can to the beſt of my knowledge; he came to Sir Richard Barker's one evening, and there he enquired for Doctor Tongue: he was in a diſguiſe, in a light coloured Coat, ſomething like to Frize, but it was not Frize; the term that they give it, I cannot ſo readily tell: he had his hair cut ſhort almoſt to his ears, and he had a broad-brim'd Hat on, and a ſmall ſtick in his hand, walking melancholly about the Hall: I happening to be the firſt body he met with as I ſuppoſe, he asked me if Doctor Tongue was within; I told him no, I had not ſeen him of a conſiderable time: he then asked me where Sir Richard Barker was; I told him he was ill now at Putney; ſays he, when will he be here; I told him I could not tell.
Did he ſee any body there but you?
That I cannot tell my Lord, not that I know of.
What time of the year was it?
And what Month?
What year and what month it was I am not able to ſay my Lord.
What became of him after that?
He went out of our Gates then: Sir, he was walking up and down melancholy, and not finding any one, as I ſuppoſe, to anſwer him, he continued walking in53 the Patients Hall, where they uſed to wait on Sir Richard Barker, that came to diſcourſe with him about Phyſick; and upon my anſwer to his queſtion he went away.
Did you ever ſee him any other time near to that time?
No, I did not.
Did you uſe to wait on Table?
No, I did not.
What Service were you then engaged in at Sir Richard Barker's?
I made up the Phyſick my Lord.
Did you not acquaint the Coach-man, nor Mrs. Mayo, nor Sir Richard Barker with it?
I think Sir Richard Barker was in Town ſoon after, and I did acquaint him with it.
But can't you tell what time this is Sir?
I can ſay no other than I have ſaid; I believe it was in 78.
Was this in June, July, or May, or when?
I cannot ſay punctually what month it was my Lord; but to the beſt of my knowledge and remembrance, it was in the beginning of May.
Had not your Maſter a Patient at Iſlington at that time, that was ſick of a Feaver?
Yes he had.
Why would Mr. Oates have given the Patient Phyſick?
No my Lord, but 'twas about that time that the Patient was under my Maſter's Cure.
Indeed the St. Omers men do ſwear thorough ſtitch, but my honeſt Witneſſes are cautious, it being ſo long ago; and he that is a Miniſter of the Church of England, (as they ſay) ſpeaks to a very day, upon a much ſlighter Circumſtance: pray call Mr. William Walker.
Here he is.
Swear him;
be pleaſed, Walker, to give my Lord to underſtand, when 'twas you ſaw me here in London in diſguiſe; and when it was you ſwore ſix years agone at the Old-Bayly, that you ſaw me here in London: Sir, the time in Controverſie is this; I came here to diſcover a Plot of the Papiſts againſt the Kings Life and the Religion, and I ſwore —
You muſt not ask queſtions in that manner. It is propereſt for you to propoſe your queſtions to the Court, and they will ask the Witneſſes.
Then I will not ask him, but propoſe it to your Lordſhip.
Ay, propoſe what queſtions you pleaſe, and if they are fair I'le ask them.
Then my Lord I would ask Mr. Walker this queſtion; when 'twas he met me with a diſguiſe, in what year and what month.
My Lord, I have been interrogated in former times upon this point, ſix or ſeven years ago, and I do confeſs I did ſee the man, and met him between St. Martins-lane and Leiceſter-fields; and truly my Lord I think I may ſay it was my unhappineſs to meet with him; for I have had a great deal of trouble by it ſince, Subpoena upon Subpoena, trouble after trouble, that I am even weary of it; for I am an old man: but I do ſay I did meet him at that end of the Town, between St. Martins-lane and Leiceſter-fields in a ſtrange diſguiſe, he was juſt like a Vagrant, a very Raſcal, and that's true I believe, my Lord.
Did you know him before?
Yes, or I had not known him then.
When was this?
My Lord I'le tell you, my Lord Chief Juſtice Scroggs, when I was at the Old-Bayly, asked me if I knew what time it was, I ſaw him thus; ſaid I my Lord, 'tis almoſt a year and a half ſince I ſaw him: and I being an old man, little thought it worth the while to lay up the particular time in my Memory; but I'le caſt about in my thoughts to make the beſt conjecture I can; for now I will not be upon my Oath, it being but conjecture.
But now you are upon your Oath, remember that, man.
My Lord, I am ſpeaking what I ſaid to the Court at that time.
Pray do not tell us an old tedious Story of the queſtions and anſwers in the Old-Bayly; but mind what is ſaid to you here: my queſtion is now, what time you ſaw Oates diſguiſed between St. Martins-lane and Leiceſter-fields as you ſay you did.
My Lord, I cannot preſcribe the time, but I'le gueſs as near as I can with the beſt probability, and that is, upon this circumſtance; when I went forward into Leiceſter-fields, in the Court before the Houſe, I ſaw the Elm-Trees budded forth as big as an Hazle-Nut: ſo that I did conjecture by that Token, it might be between Lady-day, the latter end of April; that was the time as near as I could gueſs.
In what year was that?
I cannot very well tell what year it was.
Was it in 77 or 78.
Truly my Lord, I never thought it worth ſo much taking notice of, to fix the particular time in my memory.
Whether was it that year the Plot was diſcovered, or the Michaelmaſs following.
I cannot tell when the Plot was diſcovered, or whether it be found out yet or no?
But was it the year before you were Examined?
To aſwer you Mr. Oates, when it was exactly, I cannot ſay; truly I would give you the beſt ſatisfaction I could, and do you as much right as I would do my ſelf; I think if that time when I was Examined, were in 77 or 78, it was near a year and a quarter before I did ſee you.
Well, what can you make of this?
'Tis not to be ſuppoſed he is a very willing Witneſs, but yet he ſays, 'twas a year and a quarter, before the Trial in which he was Examined, which muſt be in April 78.
I would know this queſtion of you: were you preſent at the Old-Bayley, when the Five Jeſuits were Tried?
I was there my Lord.
Were you at any Trial but one?
I was not Examin'd at any time but one.
Have you any more queſtions to ask him?
My Lord Chief Juſtice that then was, did ask me if I knew any of the Priſoners at the Bar, and I look'd upon all of them, and I ſaid I knew not either of them.
Pray my Lord, ask him whether he was not produc'd, when the St. Omers Men were produc'd, and gave his evidence as to my being in Town at that time.
He hears the Queſtion, let him anſwer it?
I am not able to anſwer you, becauſe you put ſeveral Queſtions together; but this I ſay, I was never Examined but once, though I have been Subpoena'd often, to my great torment and trouble.
Did you give Evidence at that Trial, that you ſaw me in April 78?
I teſtified that I ſaw you, and by ſuch circumſtances, it muſt be about ſuch a time as well as I could ſuggeſt; but I could not, nor cannot ſpeak poſitively.
Now my Lord, I ſhall go on to another part of my Evidence, and call ſome other Witneſſes, and firſt of all, I come to Mr. Serjeant Maynard, and I deſire he may be ſworn.
What do you ask my Brother Maynard?
I call Mr. Serjeant Maynard to give an account of the Proceedings of the Houſe of Commons upon my Diſcovery of the Popiſh Plot.
We will not admit that to be any Evidence at all; nor can it be by Law.
My Lord, Mr. Serjeant Maynard was one of the Committee of the Houſe of Commons that managed the Impeachment, and can give an account of the Evidence and Records that were produc'd at the Trial of the late Viſcount Stafford.
I know nothing truly, nor can remember any thing of it now.
He ſays, he remembers nothing.
If Mr. Oates had told me before hand, when he Subpoena'd me, what time, and what particular things he would have Examin'd me to, probably if I was there, I have Notes that I then took, but I can never ſwear to my Memory, for any Cauſe ſo long ago.
My Lord, I am very ſorry Mr. Serjeant Maynard's Age ſhould ſo impair his Memory.
I dare ſay, you are not more ſorry than he is for his Age.
Well my Lord, I cannot help it: Then I deſire Mr. Blayney may be ak'd whether he has his Notes of my Lord Stafford's Trial.
No, my Lord, I have them not here; Mr. Oates by his Ticket of his Subpoena, deſir'd only the Notes of Ireland, Whitebread and Langhorns Trial.
But I muſt tell you Mr. Oates, if thoſe Notes were here, they could be of no uſe to you without the Record of my Lord Stafford's Attainder; if you ask any thing upon another Trial, you muſt produce firſt the Record of that Trial, and then you may examine to what was given in Evidence at the Trial.
My Lord, it is of Record in the Houſe of Lords.
But that we are not to take notice of, without the Record be brought in Evidence before us: we muſt go according to the courſe of Law in all Caſes.
Then my Lord, I muſt betake my ſelf to another part of my defence, and that is to prove the frequent attempts made to baffle the Diſcovery of this Popiſh Plot, and to ſtifle the Murder of Sir Edmundbury Godfrey, and to fling it upon a Proteſtant Peer.
But that is no Evidence neither.
Surely that is very Collateral Evidence.
Nay, it is no Evidence at all in this Caſe; we muſt not admit of any ſuch Evidence to be given.
Good my Lord, if this had not been true, which was ſworn by Witneſſes that had diſcovered the Plot, why ſhould theſe Men appear to ſuborn Witneſſes (and they have been Convicted of Subornation, and endeavouring) to baffle the Diſcovery, particularly as to Juſtice Godfrey's Death?
Mr. Oates, I muſt keep you to Evidence that is proper; we are upon our Oaths to go according to Law, and the Jury are upon their Oaths to Try this Cauſe according to their Evidence; and we are bound to give them this advice in point of Law, that nothing muſt weigh, or have any conſideration with them, that you offer if it be not legal and proper Evidence: if you can ſay and prove that any of the Witneſſes that have been produc'd this day againſt you, have been tamper'd with; or that they have tamper'd with any of the former Evidence, that is a good Evidence againſt them; but it muſt not be by any means admitted that the time of the Court be taken up, or the Jury enveigled by that which has not a natural tendency to the buſineſs before us.
But if your Lordſhip pleaſe, this Conſult in April 78. was diſcovered to the Houſe of Commons among the other parts of the Diſcovery of the Treaſons of ſeveral Noble Men and Gentlemen: now upon the whole diſcovery of the Plot, I would deſire that I might give in proof the Proceedings of the Houſe of Commons.
No, no, you cannot.
Pray my Lord, is not the Journal of the Houſe of Commons Evidence?
No, we ſay it is not at all.
Is that the Opinion of the whole Court my Lord?
Yes, undoubtedly, there is no queſtion of it.
Is any Record of the Houſe of Lords Evidence?
Yes, I tell you it is, and that becauſe it is a Record; but there is a vaſt difference between the Records of the Houſe of Lords, and the Journals of the Houſe of Commons.
The Journals have been delivered in as Evidence before now.
I cannot tell what they have been, but I am ſure they ought not to be, and whatever they have been elſewhere, they cannot be here; and I'le tell you a plain reaſon for it, becauſe they have not ſo much power in the Houſe of Commons as to give an Oath: but the Houſe of Peers is a Court of Record, and therefore their Proceedings are Evidence as the Proceedings of the Kings Bench here; or any other Court of Record are.
Then my Lord if that part of my Evidence be over-rul'd; before I come to ſumm up my Evidence, I deſire to offer this thing. My Lord, I can produce ſeveral Members of the Houſe of Commons in the ſeveral Parliaments, that can remember how they proceeded againſt the Lords in the Tower, and the Popiſh Traitors upon my Diſcovery, and what credit I had in the Houſe of Commons; Will that be Evidence pray my Lord?
No, it will not, if you will produce any one that you told this to before the publick Diſcovery, that may be Evidence ſuch as it is, and is often allow'd; but what the Houſe of Commons did upon the Diſcovery, that's not any Evidence at all.
Then my Lord, ſuppoſe I can prove, that I gave an Early and Timely account to any of the Houſe of Lords of this Conſpiracy, and did acquaint them with the Conſult in April as part of it; I deſire to know whether in producing any of thoſe Lords, I ſhall give that which is Evidence.
Call whom you will that you told any thing to, that is a ſort of Evidence, I tell you?
Then I call my Lord of Devonſhire.
Here is my Lord of Devonſhire.
My Lord, I beg your pardon for the trouble I put your Lordſhip to; but your Lordſhip ſees the neceſſity of it it is for the juſtification of the Truth, to which I will give my Blood for a Seal if I be call'd to it.
My Lord of Devonſhire, your Lordſhip muſt be ſworn
Will your Lordſhip be pleaſed to acquaint the Court and the Jury (your Lordſhip being at that time a Member of the Commons Houſe) what an account I gave there of this particular Conſult (to keep to that point that is here in queſtion) before the Court this day, and with what credit I was received in all theſe Parliaments; for my Credit and the Credit of the Parliament is now in queſtion.
My Lord, all I can ſay to it is this; you Mr. Oates gave a long account of a Conſult and Conſpiracy among the Jeſuits: but I cannot remember any particular, it is ſo long ago.
Every Body knows this, you gave a long Narrative into the Houſe of Commons and Houſe of Lords too.
Ay, and it was a true one; but my Lord of Devonſhire, I deſire your Lordſhip would be pleaſed to give the Court and the Jury an account, with what credit I was received in thoſe Three Parliaments your Lordſhip ſat as Member in.
I remember that the two Weſtminſter Parliaments after the long Parliament, were ſo ſatisfied with the Diſcovery, that they paſſed a Vote in the Houſe of Commons —
The Votes of the Houſe of Commons are no Evidence at all.
They ſhow what opinion the Parliament was of.
Many Votes that have been made of late, I hope will neither be Evidence for, nor put in practice again.
My Lord, it is well known to all the World the Vote I ſpeak of.
Nay my Lord I ſpeak not to your Lordſhip; for we all know thoſe Votes that I ſpeak of were not according to your Lordſhips mind: But we only ſay thus in General, that becauſe the Houſe of Commons cannot give an Oath, therefore what is done there, is not an Evidence here, or in any Court of Record.
But my Lord, that I muſt urge, I do perceive that in the time of Parliament, and during the Sitting of the Houſe of Commons, Votes have been brought in as Barrs to the Proceedings of Inferior Courts; and this Court does not look upon it ſelf as Superior to the Great Court of Parliament, and then if they may be brought —
Which they cannot be, nor never were, nor I am ſure ought to be; nor I hope never will be as long as there is any Juſtice in the Nation.
But my Lord you will allow the Records of the Houſe of Lords to be Evidence?
Yes, I tell you I will, and for that reaſon, becauſe they are Records out of a Court of Record: an Order of Court Baron is no Evidence, becauſe it is no Court of Record; but a Judgment of a Court Leet is Evidence, becauſe it is a Court of Record; and there's the difference.
My Lord, I call in the next place my Lord of Angleſey, if he be in Court.
No, he is not here.
Pray will you give me leave to call my Lord Keeper then?
See in the Court of Chancery, whether my Lord Keeper be there.
No my Lord he is not; he is gone.
He was Subpoena'd my Lord, and I can have Affidavit made of it: he was a material Witneſs for me.
I cannot help it; he is not here.
Pray call my Lord Chief Baron.
Go one of you into the Exchequer, and ſee if my Lord Chief Baron be there, and tell him Mr. Oates calls for him as a Witneſs.
And Mr. Juſtice Levins.
The Courts are both up; and they are all gone.
They were ſubpoena'd I am ſure to be here; well go and ſee whether they are there or no.
In the mean time do you call ſome other Witneſſes.
I call my Lord Chief Juſtice Jones.
The Cryer is gone to look for the Judges.
Then I call my Lord of Clare.
Here is my Lord of Clare.
My Lord I can remember nothing it is ſo long time ago.
My Lord of Clare ſays he can remember nothing.
I only call my Lord of Clare to ask him one queſtion which I hope his Lordſhip will remember.
Swear my Lord of Clare,
well what is it you ask my Lord?
My Lord of Clare, the queſtion I would ask your Lordſhip is, with what credit I was received in the Houſe of Lords upon my Diſcovery; and that you will to the beſt of your memory, give my Lord and the Jury an account, how the Houſe of Peers proceeded upon my Evidence.
Truly my Lord I cannot give any account; it is of ſo long ſtanding.
It is a great while ago my Lord, and therefore it is hard meaſure that I muſt be brought to this Tryal ſo long after.
If it be a long time, we cannot help it: we cannot force People to proſecute ſooner than they will do.
I deſire Mr. Baron Gregory may be called.
He is not here, but ſee and call my Brother Gregory; I hear they are all together in the Treaſury.
Then I call Mr. Williams that was Speaker in the Houſe of Commons.
Here is Mr. Williams,
I deſire, Mr. Williams, becauſe you were then Speaker of the Commons Houſe of Parliament, you would be pleaſed to tell what you remember concerning the credit I received in that Parliament in which you were Speaker, upon the Diſcovery I made of the Popiſh Plot; and particularly as to the Conſult of Jeſuits to kill the late King in the month of April. 78.
My Lord, my Memory is never very good; but eſpecially in a caſe that is at ſuch a diſtance of time, and which conſiſts of ſo many Particulars as this, I mean Mr. Oates Diſcovery. But this my Lord I do remember; he was examin'd at the Bar of the Houſe of Commons and gave a long account: but it is more than any man can do to tell every Particular that is ſaid in that Houſe.
Was he upon his Oath, Mr. Williams, at the Bar of the Houſe of Commons?
My Lord, he was as other men are that are examin'd in the Houſe of Commons.
We all know it could not be upon Oath, they have not Power to give an Oath.
What Reputation he was of, I cannot ſay ſo well as what their Proceedings did teſtifie.
Nor in caſe they did believe him never ſo much, is it any thing to this queſtion, which is, whether he ſwore true or falſe at Ireland's Tryal.
My Lord, when a Perſon is brought to the Barr, there to be a Witneſs in any Cauſe, every body is ſilent, and the Witneſs is heard what he has to ſay; and ſo was Mr. Oates: when he had done he withdrew; but what the Opinion of the Houſe was upon it, I muſt ſubmit to their Votes and Reſolutions.
Which you know Mr. Williams, are no Evidence.
That I muſt ſubmit to the Court.
I deſire my Lord of Clare would be pleaſed to tell, if he remembers, what Credit the Houſe of Lords gave me upon my Diſcovery.
My Lord, I do not well hear Mr. Oates queſtion.
My Lord, my queſtion is this, when I was brought to the Bar of the Lords Houſe, whether I did not receive the thanks of the Lords Houſe for my Diſcovery?
Truly Sir, at the beginning of the Diſcovery of the Popiſh Plot, I was not in Town, nor in the Houſe.
But now Mr. Oates I hope you are ſatisfied by the anſwer that is given by your own Witneſs, that what is done in the Houſe of Commons, is no Evidence; and I would have you remember that is the Reaſon of it, becauſe they are no Court of Record, and becauſe they cannot ſo much as give an Oath.
My Lord, I ſee my Lord of Huntingdon is here; and tho I did not Subpoena his Lordſhip, nor deſign'd to have troubled him; yet being here, I deſire his Lordſhip would give the Court an account what Credit I had in the Houſe of Lords upon my Diſcovery.
Swear my Lord of Huntingdon
I do believe my Lord, Mr. Oates Diſcovery found a good reception in the Houſe of Lords; but it was grounded upon the opinion, that what he ſaid was true, and that he was an honeſt man: for ſo the Houſe then accounted him to be; and upon this it was their Lordſhips gave credit to his Teſtimony; and indeed had the matter been true, it was of high Importance to have it thorougly examined: But ſince that time it being apparent there were ſo many, and great Contradictions, Falſities, and Perjuries58 in his Evidence; upon which ſo much innocent blood hath been ſhed, I believe a great many Perſons who were concerned in the Trials of thoſe unfortunate men, are heartily afflicted and ſorry for their ſhare in it: And I do believe moſt of the Houſe of Peers have altered their opinion, as to this mans credit; and look upon his Evidence as I do, to be very falſe.
Do you hear him Mr. Oates?
No my Lord, I do not very well.
Then my Lord of Huntingdon turn your face to the Jury; and ſay what you ſaid to us over again.
Which his Lordſhip did to the ſame Effect.
Very well my Lord.
There's your Credit with the Houſe of Lords, Mr. Oates.
My Lord, I call'd you in to anſwer my queſtion, as to ſomewhat what is paſt, and to give your judgment how you are inclin'd to believe now.
Nay, but with your favour, it was to declare what opinion the Houſe of Lords had of you; and he ſays very well, and that is in truth the ſame anſwer that muſt be given, for the Judges and the Juries that try'd the People upon your Evidence: ſays my Lord of Huntingdon at firſt, truly I did believe Mr. Oates did ſwear true, and he had credit with me, and ſo he had with others; But now upon further Examination into things, and in proceſs of time Diſcoveries have been made of the truth, and that what he ſwore, is falſe; ſo that now I believe in my Conſcience he is actually forſworn, and has drawn innocent Blood upon the Nation; and no body will believe a word he ſays.
Well my Lord, I have done with my Lord of Huntingdon.
And he has done with you, as I perceive.
Yes, truly methinks ye ſhake hands and part very fairly.
There's my Lord Chief Baron; what ſay you to him Mr. Oates?
Is my Lord Chief Baron ſworn?
Yes, my Lord, he is.
Then what do you ask him?
My Lord, I call'd your Lordſhip, becauſe your Lordſhip ſate as a Commiſſioner of Oyer and Terminer in the Old-Bayly, at Ireland, Whitebread and Langhorn's Tryals; and that which I call your Lordſhip for, is to give an account to my Lord and the Jury, of the ſatisfaction your Lordſhip received concerning the fullneſs and fairneſs of the Evidence then deliver'd by me in thoſe Tryals.
My Lord, I cannot charge my memory with it.
He ſays he cannot remember.
No not in particular; but in general I remember there was a great many Perſons that gave Evidence in thoſe Tryals on the one ſide and the other: There were a great many Perſons that came from St. Omers, that gave Evidence there of Mr. Oates being at St. Omers, when he ſaid he was in Town.
And what Credit were they of at that time, pray my Lord?
I think they were Perſons of very good Credit; they were Gentlemen of good Families many of them.
Did the Jury believe them at that time?
I cannot tell what the Jury did.
Nor is it any matter at all what they did: But I would ask you my Lord but one queſtion: Have you heard this Evidence that has been given here to day?
No my Lord, I have not.
If you had, I would then have ask'd you, whether you believe him now or not.
Truly my Lord, I never had any great Faith in him, I do aſſure you, as to my ſelf.
You hear what he ſays Mr. Oates; you had never any great Credit with him.
My Lord, I am not at all concern'd at this; I value my ſelf more upon my own Innocency and Integrity, than any Man's good or bad Opinion whatſoever.
Ah! your innocency is very great!
Then my Lord, I will conclude my Evidence.
My Lord, before Mr. Oates goes to ſumm up his Evidence, we have ſome other Evidence to give.
What ſay you Mr. Oates? will you call any other Witneſſes to this point?
My Lord, if they bring any other Evidence, I hope I may have my turn to anſwer it.
Ah! Truly, if they bring any new Evidence that you have not applied to already, God forbid, that you ſhould not be heard; but if it only gives an anſwer to the Evidence that has been given, then you muſt not retort on them: for they are to have the laſt word; but it is not fit withal, that you ſhould be denied any thing that is neceſſary or really of advantage to you.
If they offer any new Evidence to my diſ-reputation, the queſtion is, whether I may have a time allotted me to make my defence againſt that Evidence.
Ah! Ah! In God's name by all means?
This is the uſual method of Proceedings; but I would know if Mr. Oates has any more Witneſſes to Examine to this point, that he has examin'd to already.
My Lord, I think I have no further Evidence at preſent, till I hear what they further ſay.
Then may it pleaſe your Lordſhip, and you Gentlemen of the Jury —
I hope when your Lordſhip ſumms up the Evidence, you'll remember what has been ſaid by the Witneſſes.
You may aſſure your ſelf, I will remember whatſoever has been ſaid on the one ſide and t'other, as near as I can: the Gentlemen of the Jury are Men of underſtanding, and I ſee they take Notes, and I'le give them all the aſſiſtance I can.
Truly my Lord, I have ſome more Witneſſes to the ſame purpoſe, if your Lordſhip pleaſe to ſpare time to hear them.
Ah! Ah! We ſit here to hear the Witneſſes, call whom you will.
Is my Lord Lovelace here.
I cannot tell, I do not ſee him here; but you did call my Brother Gregory, there he is, what ſay you to him?
Mr. Baron Gregory was Speaker of the Houſe of Commons in one of the Weſtminſter Parliaments.
Swear my Brother Gregory,
I deſire your Honour would be pleas'd to give this Court and the Jury an account, you being Speaker of the Houſe of Commons, what credit I received there in that Houſe upon my diſcovery of the Popiſh Plot.
My Lord, that is a pretty general queſtion, it is not poſſible for me to remember the Proceedings in the Houſe of Commons ſo long ago.
But Brother, I tell you what he means by it: he would have you to anſwer this queſtion, whether he was of good credit in the Houſe of Commons or not.
I know not what anſwer to make about the credit he there had: any Member of the Houſe of Commons may give as good and better an account in that matter than I; and truly I do not remember that Mr. Oates was before the Barr of the Houſe when I was Speaker: I believe it was before I was Speaker, that he was Examined at the Commons Barr.
Well, he can remember nothing of it.
Is my Lord Lovelace there?
He has been call'd, but he is not here.
Call my Lord of Stamford.
He is not here.
Call Sir Francis Winnington.
He is not here.
Call Silas Titus Eſq
He is not here.
Call Sir George Treby.
He is not here.
Call Sir Francis Pemberton: Theſe have been all Subpoena'd.
He is not here.
Is my Lord Biſhop of London?
Here is my Lord Biſhop of London, pray ſwear my Lord Biſhop of London;
I beg your Lordſhip, if you can, would give an account of your remembrance in this matter: your Lordſhip was often in Committees of the Houſe of Peers about this buſineſs, and from firſt to laſt, you were in the Committee for further Examination of the Popiſh Plot; And you were not only of the Committee, but you alſo ſate as a Baron in the Houſe. 60I humbly beg your Lordſhip would pleaſe to tell as far as you can charge your Memory, what Reputation I had in the Houſe of Lords, where I was upon my Oath, and in particular, whether your Lordſhip remembers that I received the thanks of the Houſe for the Service I had done for the King and Kingdom in the Diſcovery.
It is a long queſtion my Lord.
It is ſo my Lord; but my anſwer will be very ſhort: for it is a very little I can remember after ſo great a diſtance of time, and the tranſactions have been publick; nor can I acquaint the Court with any thing, but what is known already; and that is this, I remember that the Plot was diſcovered by him, and his diſcovery was receiv'd as Evidence at the Barr of the Houſe of Lords, and believ'd, and the thanks of the Houſe were given him at that time for it.
There's Sir George Treby, What do you ask him? but firſt let him be ſworn?
Pray be pleas'd to ask Sir George Treby, who was Chair-man of the Committee of Secrecy, and was manager in the Trial of the Lord Viſcount Stafford, that he will be pleas'd to tell what Credit I had in both Houſes upon that Trial.
I told you before, you muſt urge nothing of that Trial, unleſs you have the Record-here.
Then my Lord, I deſire Sir George may give an account what he knows of the correſpondencies between Mr. Coleman and the See of Rome.
No, that will not be any Evidence at all in this caſe; for that is not at all here in queſtion.
Then my Lord, I deſire Sir George Treby may ſpeak what he knows of my Credit in the Houſe of Commons.
Ah! What ſays he to that?
My Lord, I can anſwer for nothing but my own Judgment; I cannot tell what Credit he had with any particular Member of the Houſe of Commons; I do remember indeed, he was there ſeveral times at the Barr, but not upon Oath, but as others uſually are there, and concerning the diſcovery: there was a Vote all the Kingdom knows of, that they were ſatisfied there was a Plot, but whether that Vote was grounded altogether upon his Evidence, or how far upon his Evidence, I cannot tell, nor what any Man thought of it beſides my ſelf.
I deſire Mr. Serj. Pemberton might be call'd again.
He is not here.
Then pray call Sir William Dolben.
He is not here neither.
Then I call Sir Edward Atkins.
He is not here.
Call Mr. Richard White.
He is not here.
My Lord, theſe were all Subpoena'd, but they will not come; they are frighted away.
We know nothing of that, they may come if they will.
Call Mr. Thomas Cox.
He is not here, but here is Mr. White.
I pray he may be ſworn,
I deſire to know of him whether he were not a Jury man upon the Trials of Ireland and Whitebread.
No, I was not.
Then I am miſtaken, I beg your pardon for this trouble.
Well, there's my Brother Dolben come now. What ſay you to him? Swear my Brother Dolben?
May it pleaſe you Sir William Dolben, you ſate as a Judge upon the Trials of Mr. Ireland, Mr. Whitebread and Mr. Langhorn; and I call you, Sir William Dolben, to give an account to my Lord and the Jury, what Credit my Evidence had at thoſe Tryals, and how the Jury was ſatisfied with it.
There is the Verdict man, that finds the Perſons you ſpeak of Guilty.
If that be Evidence enough, I am ſatisfied my Lord.
Is not that better than his Opinion to ſhow how the Jury was ſatisfied; Ah! certainly better than the Opinion of all the twelve Judges; for that point they would not have Convicted them, except they had been ſatisfied with the Evidence.
Have you done with me Sir?
I have Sir.
Have you call'd all your Witneſſes, or will you call any more?
No my Lord, I will call no more at preſent.
Then my Lord wee'l go on with another part of our Evidence. Gentlemen, you ſee Dr. Oates, to ſupport his Credit, has given two ſorts of Evidence; the one is, ſome Records of Tryals at the Old-Bayly, wherein he had the good hap to be believ'd: the other is ſeveral noble Perſons, and other Gentlemen, as to the Credit he has had given to hi•Evidence before. What they have ſaid, I ſhall not meddle with at all at this time, but leave the Obſervations that are to be made thereupon, till we come to ſumm up the Evidence for the King. But as to the firſt part of his Evidence, that is, as to the Records produced, and the Verdicts therein given, and the Opinions of the Judges, we have this to ſay in point of Evidence as an anſwer. 1. We ſhall produce to you, ſeveral Records, wherein he has not been believ'd; as that of Sir George Wakeman, and my Lord Caſtlemain; and not only ſo, but we ſhall actually prove that he was perjur'd in them; that what he ſwore againſt them was utterly falſe, and you will hear, this was not the firſt time that he had ſworn falſe: for•n an Accuſation that he gave at a Tryal at Haſtings, we ſhall prove he ſwore Buggery upon a Perſon, which was prov'd falſe.
Can you produce any ſuch Record Mr. Attorney?
Yes, we ſhall.
Do not interrupt the Kings Council; let them go on: you ſhall be heard quietly in your time.
Nay, Mr. Oates need not be ſo haſty to ask for the Records, by degrees we ſhall produce Records enough againſt him.
We ſhall prove alſo by the Journals of the Lords Houſe, that he did forſwear himſelf: for after he had there made a long Narrative of the Plot, being askt whether he had any more to accuſe, than thoſe Perſons that he had nam'd, and this upon his Oath; he did there ſwear that he had no more Perſons to accuſe.
That were Members of that Houſe, it was.
Sir, you muſt be quiet till they have done.
But ſoon after he bethought himſelf, and accuſes the Queen and His Royal Highneſs the Duke, our now preſent Sovereign, of being in the Plot.
What Plot did I accuſe them of?
Nay, you muſt ſit down and be quiet; how now, will you not let the Kings Council ſpeak? you were heard quietly, and ſo ſhall they be too.
Well my Lord, I will be quiet.
Theſe things, my Lord, will ſhow of what Credit he was of at that time: Another thing we ſay to theſe Records, is this; There were two other Witneſſes, Mr. Clay and Mr. Smith, beſides thoſe that were now produced, which were the home Witneſſes, that did poſitively ſwear, that in April and May 78. Oates was here in Town: he did then indeed make uſe of thoſe other canting Witneſſes, for I cannot call them any otherwiſe, that beat ſo about the Buſh, and ſpeak of uncertainties, and contradict one another; but thoſe that I name, Clay and Smith, were home Witneſſes, and there lay the Credit of his being in Town, when the Witneſſes which came from St. Omers, ſay he was beyond Sea.
My Lord, I beg I may ask one thing; whether my Lord Biſhop of London be there ſtill?
No, my Lord of London is gone.
I am ſorry for it, becauſe he could have given an account of this Smith, for he knows him.
I cannot help it, you ſhould have deſir'd him to ſtay while he was here; go on Mr. Attorney.
I will my Lord; and this which I am going to ſay, as an anſwer to his Evidence, which will give a full anſwer to that other Objection which he made, which was, what was the Reaſon, when he had given ſuch an Evidence ſo long ago, it ſhould be delayed ſo long e're it was proſecuted. I'le give your Lordſhip a Reaſon and a ſatisfactory one, till thoſe Diſcoveries were made that have lately been made: The Evidence theſe Witneſſes gave, carried a probability of truth in it; and Sir Richard Barker himſelf added his Teſtimony to it, tho he does not think fit now to come and confirm it: I ſay hitherto it had ſome ſemblance of truth, and ſo did ballance the other Teſtimony of them that came from St. Omers: But when we had diſcover'd that it could be teſtified by twenty Perſons, that had not been at any of the former Tryals, that he was certainly all that time at St. Omers; and when we had diſcover'd the Tampering and Practices of Mr. Oates, in Suborning theſe Witneſſes to ſwear as corruptly as he ſwore at firſt; which we ſhall ſhow you palpably to be true that he did ſo; that gave us encouragement to go on to make enquiry into the matter; but this was not diſcover'd till half a year ago, or thereabouts. Now as to one of thoſe Witneſſes, that is Mr. Clay, the caſe ſtands thus; indeed I expected he would have brought62 the ſame Witneſſes he did then; for I preſume they are all about Town, but he has not thought fit to do that: This Clay was then a Prieſt, and a Priſoner in the Gate-houſe for that very reaſon as being accuſed for being a Romiſh Prieſt; while he was there a Priſoner, Mr. Oates comes and threatens him, and ſollicits him to ſwear that he was here in Town in May 78. that he might be provided with proof againſt what the Boys of St. Omers (as he call'd them) would come to teſtifie; and threaten'd him if he did not, he would hang him, for he could ſwear him to be a Prieſt; and this was about three or four days before the Tryal of the Five Jeſuits: At length they came to a Bargain and Agreement, as you will hear, that he ſhould come and ſwear this; when Mr. Oates cannot pretend that the Evidence of Clay was known at all by any of the Committees that were concern'd in the management of his Diſcovery; or that he was ſo much as though of for a Witneſs. But we ſhall prove how it came to paſs; and I believe, if Mr. Oates would call him now, (as I do not queſtion he knows where to have him) Clay would not be ſo hardy now, as to affirm his former Teſtimony. Then as for Mr. Smith, his Caſe ſtands thus: Mr. Oates had ſworn him into the Plot, as you will find in his Narrative that he gave in upon Oath, which is upon Record, and enter'd in the Journals of the Lords Houſe. He was a School-Maſter in Iſlington, and Oates ſwears High Treaſon againſt him; and thereupon Warrants went out to take this Smith, and Mr. Oates was very violent in the purſuit of him but two or three days before the Tryal; and then, when all theſe Witneſſes from St. Omers were come, as he knew very well, he was in ſome doubt his deſign would have fail'd, and then does he prevail with Smith to become a Witneſs for him. And 'tis evident he did tamper with him, from that which was done by him at that time: For now he gives him under his hand, (to ſhew the Impudence, as well as Villany of the man) as it has been evident enough in all his carriage) a Paper that ſhould give him Authority to go free from all Proceſs and Arreſts upon any Warrants; and this Protection under Mr. Oates hand, is directed to all the Kings Officers, thereby commanding them to take notice that this Mr. Smith, whom before he had accus'd of being in the Plot, was an honeſt man, and employed in great Service for the King at that time. This Paper, when produc'd, will ſhow the time when it was made; and then it will appear, that two days after Smith comes and Swears that he din'd with him the firſt Monday in May in 78. This was what Smith ſwore then; and upon my mentioning of this Practice, if he have any ſhame in him, it muſt put him in ſome confuſion: for we are prepar'd to prove by undeniable Teſtimony, that Mr. Oates did not dine with this Mr. Smith that day: we ſhall prove it by the whole Family; but the firſt time ever Mr. Oates came there, was in July after, when he came into England from St. Omers, which theſe Witneſſes ſay, was the latter end of June. Then it was that he was with Mr. Smith, and came to his Houſe, and not before. And we ſhall prove by ſeveral Witneſſes, that upon the queſtions being asked of Mr. Smith, how he came to teſtifie ſuch a thing, his anſwer was, I muſt have died for it, if I had not don't, 'twas only a miſtake in point of time: But he threatned me, and ſo did ſome others too, that he would have me hang'd for being in the Plot, if I did not comply with him, and ſwear this for him. My Lord, I ſhall offer this Evidence that I have open'd, and then I hope we ſhall ſatisfie the Jury, and all that hear this Tryal, that he is one of the moſt notorious Villains that liv'd upon the Earth; to be ſure that ever was known in this Kingdom.
Firſt my Lord, wee'l produce our Records, where is the Record of Sir George Wakeman.
This is the Record of Sir George Wakeman, and this is a true Copy, I examin'd it.
Pray Sir Samuel Aſtry, read a word or two of it.
Here is an Indictment againſt Sir George Wakeman for High Treaſon, he pleaded not Guilty; and here is an Acquittal by the Jury.
He being acquitted, I deſire he may be ſworn,
Pray Sir George Wakeman, was Mr. Oates ſworn againſt you at the Tryal?
Yes Mr. Sollicitor, he was.
Do you remember what he ſwore againſt you at that Tryal?
Yes, I do Sir.
Was that true that he ſwore, by the Oath you have taken?
Is that a fair queſtion? I deſire the opinion of the Court.
Ah! Why not?
He was legally accus'd; he cannot ſwear himſelf off.
But he is legally acquitted to, we have a Record for that here.
Ah! My Lord, he was acquitted, it's well known how.
Come Sir, was that he ſwore againſt you at your Trial true?
'Twas falſe.
What do you ſay Sir?
'Twas falſe upon my Oath, my Lord.
What particulars did he ſwear againſt you?
Ah! Pray tell the particulars as near as you can what he ſwore againſt you.
My Lord, if your Lordſhip pleaſe, I will give a little account what he ſwore againſt me before the King and Council.
That will not do Sir George Wakeman, we do not ask you that.
No, it muſt be only the Evidence that was given upon this Acquittal, which is the Record here produc'd before us, what did he ſwear againſt you then?
He ſwore at that Trial as near as I can remember, that I undertook for a certain Summ of Money, 15000 l. as I think it was to poyſon the King, and I was to do it by the means of the Queen. I was to provide this Poyſon by for her, and ſhe was to give it to the King. This he ſwore at my Trial, which God forbid it ſhould be true; nothing can be more falſe.
I ask you by the Oath you have taken, you are now quitted, and ſo in no danger; and being upon your Oath, ought to ſpeak the truth without malice or ill will to him that did accuſe you; was that he ſwore true or falſe?
Falſe, falſe, upon my Oath; I ſpeak it without any malice againſt the Man in the World.
Then ſwear my Lord Caſtlemain,
My Lord, I'le be bound to make it appear, that all he ſwore againſt me was falſe.
And ſo was it he ſwore againſt my Lord Caſtlemain and others that were acquitted at the ſame time with Sir George Wakeman.
Firſt read the Record of my Lord Caſtlemain's Acquittal.
Here is the very Record it ſelf: It was in this Court my Lord Caſtlemain was Indicted of High Treaſon, and Tried and Acquitted.
My Lord Caſtlemain, pray what did Oates ſwear againſt you at your Trial and pray tell the Court whether that was true or falſe.
My Lord, as near as I remember, Mr. Oates did ſwear at my Trial, that he met me in Lincolns-Inn-fields, and that he went with me ſomewhere to Mr. Fenwicks Chamber in Dukes-ſtreet in Covent-garden, where he ſaid I did talk a great deal of Treaſon, and a great diſcourſe of that kind he ſaid there was, and he ſwore that I was in ſeveral Cabals in relation to the Kings death: I was afterwards acquitted by the Jury that Tri'd me, as appears by the Record; and here I do declare, as in the preſence of God, and with all the Imprecations of divine vengeance to fall upon me, if I ſpeak any thing but the truth, that not only that which he ſwore was falſe, but that I never had any thoughts in my heart, much leſs did ever declare in my words of any injury or hurt againſt the late King. And beſides, that I never ſaw the face of Oates in my life, till after I was put in Priſon upon his accuſation of me.
My Lord, I deſire to know what Religion that Noble Lord is of?
I am a Roman Catholick my Lord.
We all know what Religion my Lord is of, you need not ask that queſtion.
That's not the point my Lord, I muſt have declar'd in Evidence.
I wonder to ſee any Man that has the face of a Man carry it at this rate, when he hears ſuch an Evidence brought in againſt him.
I wonder that Mr. Attorney will offer to bring this Evidence, Men that muſt have malice againſt me —
Hold your Tongue; you are a ſhame to Mankind.
No, my Lord, I am neither a ſhame to my ſelf or Mankind: what I have ſworn is true, and I will ſtand by it to my laſt breath, and ſeal it if occaſion be with my Blood.
'Twere pitty but that it were to be done by thy Blood.
Ah! Ah! my Lord, I know why all this is, and ſo may the World very eaſily too.
Such impudence and impiety was never known in any Chriſtian Nation.
But this will not do the work to make the Plot to be disbelieved; things are not to be done by great noiſes: I will ſtand by the truth.
Can you think to out-face ſuch Evidence as this with your Impudence?
But I hope you'l give me leave to make my defence.
Then carry your ſelf as becomes you in the Court.
My Lord, I will do ſo.
If you do not, we know how to make you do it, you ſhall not think to Domineer here.
My Lord, I hope I do behave my ſelf as I ought.
No, You do not.
Ill Language may provoke any Mans Paſſion my Lord.
Keep your ſelf within bounds, and you ſhall be heard; but we'll ſuffer none of your Extravagancies.
My Lord, If I had been aware of this, I could have produc'd Evidence that would have ſupported my Teſtimony in theſe matters.
Go on with your Proofs Mr. Attorney.
We will do ſo my Lord.
Have you done with me Sir?
Have you any other queſtions to ask my Lord Caſtlemain?
No, my Lord.
Then your Lordſhip may fit down again where you were.
Now my Lord, we ſhall ſhow the Lords Journal where it is Recorded, that he ſwore, he could accuſe no body elſe but thoſe that he nam'd, and then we ſhall give an account that ſoon after, he accus'd our preſent Soveraign, and the Queen Dowager.
Where is the Clerk of the Parliament.
Here he is. Mr. Walker.
Swear him,
Mr. Walker, is that the Journal of the Houſe of Lords.
Yes, my Lord, it is.
Deliver it in to the Clerk, and let him read it.
Then you muſt direct to the time, or elſe it will be to no purpoſe.
Sir Samuel Aſtry pray turn to Friday the 29th. of November 78.
C. of Crown Reads,Die veneris decimo nono Novembris 1678. Titus Oates being call'd in at the Barr, deſired to be heard a few words before he was ſworn —
Mr. Attorney, I doubt this will not be Evidence: it is only a Paper of what he laid, taken before the Lords; but now whether that was upon Oath or no, is the queſtion, nay it appears it was not upon Oath; but ſays, it was before he was ſworn.
My Lord, I deſire it may be read all out.
C. Crown Reads,Titus Oates being call'd in at the Barr, deſir'd he might be heard a few words, before he was ſworn to ſpeak to the main buſineſs, which being granted to him, he complain'd of the reſtraint he is under, and being debarr'd of the liberty of his Friends coming to him, and of converſing with any body in private, and that no Engliſh-man ought to be reſtrain'd, unleſs accus'd by one or more Witneſſes; and pray'd that the reſtraint might be taken off, that he might be enabled to give his Evidence more cheerfully, and that the Houſe would be pleas'd to addreſs to the King for that purpoſe, and that his pardon may be renewed, becauſe he is under miſpriſion of Treaſon, to which the Lord Chancellour told him, that the Houſe would take his condition into conſideration, and then being ſworn, he was told by Lord Chancellour, that the Lords have received an Addreſs from the Houſe of Commons in part upon Evidence by him given there, and that the Houſe expects he ſhould give an account what that is, which has begot ſuch aſtoniſhment in the Houſe of Commons as is expreſſed in the Addreſs, upon which Titus Oates ſaid, that in July laſt, he ſaw a Letter from Sir George Wakeman —
Is this Evidence Mr. Attorney?
My Lord, the uſe we make of it is to prove that he did accuſe the Queen.
What is the accuſation of the Queen to this purpoſe?
My Lord, we ſay he had ſworn ſeveral days before that he had no other perſons to accuſe.
You ſhould produce that firſt that he ſwore ſo.
My Lord, we ſhould ſo, I think, and I thought it had been ſo done.
This is no Evidence, for it is not upon Oath; it does not ſay ſo.
Yes, it does my Lord; but we will go on in order.
Come then, let us ſee what was ſworn about his having no more Perſons to accuſe.
Pray Sir Samuel Aſtry look the 30th. of October 78.
Die Mercurii 30. Octobris 1678. Titus Oates being call'd in, was ſworn at the Barr, and requir'd to anſwer to what he is now call'd in for concerning his diſcourſe with the Lord Anneſly laſt night, about the Duke of York.
I doubt this will not be Evidence neither; for we are now ſpeaking only about what ſhall be Evidence: We are not now medling with the methods of the Houſe in their Examination of Witneſſes, but what is Evidence here; ſuppoſe an Oath be adminiſtred to me for a particular purpoſe in the Houſe of Lords, that I ſhall anſwer to what is asked me concerning a diſcourſe that I had with a third perſon.
Pray Sir Sam. Aſtry look the next day; for there my Lord, he is examin'd upon the general.
Die Jovis 31 of Octobris 1678.
But firſt read the latter end of the former days Proceedings, beginning at thoſe words upon conſideration.
Upon conſideration of what Titus Oates had ſaid, he was call'd in again, and told by the Lord Chancellour that the Houſe has directed he ſhall be heard again to morrow at Nine a Clock, and the Lords do expect that by the Oath he hath now taken, he ſhould go thorow with what he hath to ſay, and therefore he ſhould prepare himſelf to deliver the whole truth of what he knows concerning the deſign againſt the Kings Perſon, and the Government of this Kingdom.
But ſtill Mr. Attorney, we are but where we were; for ſuppoſing upon my Examination upon Oath given me in the Houſe of Lords to a particular purpoſe, That my Lord Chancellor ſhould tell me here; my Lords intend to morrow, that you by vertue of the Oath now given you, ſhould come and give them ſatisfaction as to other queſtions, I doubt that would not be Evidence in Weſtminſter-hall: let us not ſtretch any thing further than it ſhould be upon any account whatſoever: for ſuppoſe I give you an Oath to make true anſwer to ſuch queſtions as I ſhall ask you concerning what was ſaid at the Seſſions-houſe at ſuch a Trial, and then I come after and ask you upon the Oath you have taken, what do you ſay concerning ſuch a buſineſs 7 Years ago, would that be Evidence?
With ſubmiſſion my Lord, if a Man be told he is upon his Oath, to ſay all he knows of ſuch a deſign, what he ſays upon that Oath, is Evidence.
You ſay very true Mr. Attorney, if I give him a general Oath; but what he ſays concerning any other matter than that particular thing, which he was ſworn to give an account of, can never be Evidence.
Truly my Lord, I think we need not labour in ſuch a thing as this is.
Truly Mr. Sollicitour, I think it is no Evidence at all, if you can prove he was ſworn to his whole Narrative, and can bring any thing out of that, You ſay ſomething.
We deſire that my Lord of Berkley may be ſworn,
What do you ask him?
Pray my Lord, will you give the Court and the Jury an account whether M. Oates was not ſworn to his Narrative, and deliver'd in his Evidence at your Lordſhips Barr upon Oath.
My Lord of Berkley, let me ask you this queſtion, was every thing that he gave an account of at the Barr of the Lords Houſe, given in upon Oath?
I cannot remember that my Lord.
It is impoſſible that he ſhould.
All I can teſtifie is but what I anſwered to the queſtion, which was asked me at my Lord Stafford's Trial.
But that is not material now my Lord, becauſe the Record of that Trial is not here.
The ſame thing is entered here particularly.
My Lord, we deſire it may be read again.
Read it again with all my Heart.
This is a particular Oath to a particular purpoſe; and ſhall I help it by intendment that he was afterwards ſworn to the general matter? No, I will not: ſuppoſe any thing had happen'd afterwards that it ſhould have been thought fit to proſecute Oates; Could the Man have been Convicted of Perjury for this? certainly he never could.
Well my Lord, we ſubmit it to you; but we will now go on to prove that which Mr. Attorney opened, that Oates did ſuborn theſe Witneſſes to ſwear what they did ſwear: you have had one part of the Evidence that was then given; now we ſhall prove that Clay was ſworn at Whitebreads Trial, and what he did there teſtify about Oates being in Town.
I own it, he was ſworn then.
Do you own that you ſuborn'd him?
No, I think not Mr. Attorney.
Then we will prove that you did tamper with him, and by threatnings prevail'd with him to ſwear for you.
Nay, we will prove that he was miſtaken in what he did ſwear a whole Year. Pray call Mr. Charles Howard.
My Lord, I deſire I may have leave to ask the Court a queſtion, and I beg the Opinion of the Court in it, whether a Popiſh Recuſant Convicted, may be a good Witneſs.
We are not bound to anſwer your queſtion; for we ſee no ground why you ſhould ask it: if you have any occaſion to object againſt any Witneſs, and can produce any Record againſt him; then we will tell you more of our minds.
Pray then let me ask you another queſtion my Lord.
Prethee do not trouble us with thy queſtions, let them go on with their Evidence.
My Lord, I deſire to know whether a Man confeſſing himſelf a Popiſh Prieſt —
We do not ſit here to anſwer every idle queſtion; 'tis nothing at all to the purpoſe: When you ask a proper queſtion, we will anſwer it.
Yes, it is my Lord, and you are of my Council in matter of Law.
I am not ſo.
Yes, my Lord, the Court is always of Council for the Priſoner.
That were well indeed, if we were bound to give advice in every caſe where a Man is Proſecuted at the Kings Suit; indeed in thoſe caſes where a Man can have no Council allow'd him, the Court is of Council for him; but where he may have Council, the Judges are not of Council for him.
Beſides, We are not here putting of Caſes, but trying of a Cauſe.
Here is Mr. Charles Howard, ſwear him,
My Lord, we bring this Gentleman Mr. Charles Howard only to this part of our Evidence, to prove that Mr. Clay was miſtaken a whole Year, miſtook 78 for 77.
But Mr. Sollicitor, if you take this confuſed method, we ſhall never be at an end, and for my part I cannot make any thing of it; it is impoſſible for me to retain theſe things in memorie, ſo as to give any direction to the Jury, if there be not a method uſed: for do you think that it is poſſible for any Man to retain in his head a hundred things hudled up and down without any order.
We beg your Lordſhips patience but a little while, and we ſhall have it in very good order. Swear Higgins,
Pray what do you ask him?
The matter we examine him to is this; for I would open to you the nature of our Evidence, 1. He ſwore Smith into the Plot, and then gave him a Certificate, that he vvas an honeſt Man.
Is that Oates's hand.
We ſhall prove it to be ſo.
You muſt firſt prove vvhat he ſwore of Smith.
My Lord, We deſire that vve may read his Narrative.
But firſt prove it Mr. Attorney.
It is upon Record in the Houſe of Lords.
Was that delivered in upon Oath to the Houſe of Lords, or elſe vve ſhall be but vvhere vve vvere.
For proof of that vve call my Lord Bridgewater.
Here he is, ſwear my Lord,
My Lord Bridgewater, do you remember the Narrative that Oates gave in to the Houſe of Lords, and vvas it upon Oath? but firſt of all if you pleaſe, I deſire my Lord may ſee the Book, whether any thing be there under his hand, and then vvhether it be enter'd to be upon Oath, and vvhether this be the Journal agreeing with the Paper deliver'd in.
This is a Narrative my Lord, that he himſelf deliver'd in, and I vvould ask my Lord Bridgewater this one queſtion: Was not this Journal compar'd vvith the Narrative given in upon Oath by Order of the Lords Houſe.
Yes, I muſt ſay I was one of the Committe appointed to take care of the Journal, and here is my hand to it among other Lords, and that is a Copy of what M. Oates did deliver in as his Narrative which was in inſerted upon a report of the Committe into the Journal Book by Order of the Lords, and we did examine the Narrative with the Book.
But what is all this to our purpoſe now; do not miſtake me my Lord Bridgwater, I do not ſpeak to you now, but to Mr. Attorney: What does this prove as to the matter in hand?
Pray my Lord Bridgwater, did you ſee the Narrative brought in by Oates?
That Narrative was delivered to us by the Clerk of the Parliament.
But my Lord, do you know that Narrative was given in upon Oath?
I know no other, but that the Clerk of the Parliament brought it to us.
Here is the Clerk of the Parliament, will tell you that Oates was ſworn to it.
Prove it if you can; but hitherto I ſee nothing that looks like Evidence.
Really my Lord, I ſhould take it to be as much Evidence as any that ever was offer'd in the World.
Pray Mr. Attorney let us Reaſon the Point a little; ſuppoſe you bring an anſwer in Chancery; except the man be ſworn to it, can you read his anſwer; and yet I ever look'd upon an anſwer in Chancery as Evidence.
In that caſe the Record proves it ſelf, and ſo it ſhould here; and therefore we deſire it may be read.
But ſurely you would not allow an anſwer to be Evidence, unleſs you prove it to be ſworn.
Truly my Lord I always took it, that we need not come to prove a man was actually ſworn to his anſwer; but if it be once enter'd upon Record in Chancery, it proves it ſelf.
It is true Mr. Attorney, if it appears upon Record that the anſwer was ſworn.
My Lord, if this Journal of the Houſe of Lords is a Record, then that which is entred into it is a Record; 'tis a thing recorded as a Deed inrolled is, and proves it ſelf.
Mr. Attorney, either we miſtake one another, or we do not differ in opinion: if you could make it appear that Oates brought this thing in the Houſe of Lords, and deliver'd it upon Oath, that were Evidence; otherwiſe I cannot ſee how you can make Evidence of it.
I always thought my Lord, that a Record out of a Court of Record, would have that Credit in another Court of Record, as to be read.
My Lord Bridgewater tells you, it was deliver'd to them by the Clerk of the Parliament.
Pray my Lord let the Clerk read what is at the end thereof.
Hitherto examin'd the third of December 1678. The Narrative and Examinations of Titus Oates, being firſt inſerted according to the Order of the Houſe, of the 21. of November laſt, by us Angleſey, &c.
Pray read the Order of the 21. of November.
Die Jovis 21. of November 1678. Upon Report made by the Earl of Bridgewater, from the Lords Sub-Committees for the examining the Journal of this Houſe; That upon Examination thereof, their Lordſhips find, that the Narrative made upon Oath by Titus Oates at the Barr on the 31. of October laſt, of the Horrid Deſign againſt His Majeſties Perſon and Government; is only mentioned in the Journal, but not enter'd at large in ſuch manner as he then related it; and that therefore their Lordſhips deſire, the direction of the Houſe concerning this matter: it is thereupon ordered, that the ſaid Narrative made by Titus Oates on the ſaid 31. of October, ſhall be enter'd at large, and inſerted in the Journal, as the part of the buſineſs of that day.
Now you make it Evidence; for it appears that he was ſworn, and gave his Narrative upon Oath.
Then now my Lord, I hope we may read it.
Ay, read it.
Read the 54. Article.
This is the Narrative of Titus Oates, the 54. Article. That one Matthew Medborne a Player in the Dukes Theatre; one Mr. Penny, Mr. Mannock, Mr. Sharpe, and Mr. Seddon, and one William Smith a School-maſter at Iſlington, and one Edward Everard and others, meeting in a Club on Thurſday nights, and Sunday nights, with one Jones a Prieſt, and one Keymaſh within mentioned; and all theſe Perſons are imployed by the Jeſuits, to vilifie the Houſe of Commons, and to go about the City to incenſe the People againſt them, and againſt the Biſhops of the Nation; and they deliver this Treaſonable Poſition, That the Commons aſſembled in Parliament, are the Devils Repreſentatives and not the Nations; with treaſonable and deteſtable words, the Deponent did hear at the ſaid Club which is kept at Fuller's Rents near Grey's Inn. And in the month of Auguſt the Deponent was ordered by the Jeſuits in London, to give the ſaid Perſons great Reſpects, and in their names to thank the Club for their faithfulneſs to them in that particular.
Thus you ſee what he had ſworn againſt him; now we ſhall ſhew how he dealt with him. Is that Mr. Oates his hand?
It is; yes I believe it is.
I believe he will hardly deny it himſelf.
Let me ſee it I pray you, Mr. Attorney.
Show it him,
is that your hand?
I cannot ſay it is my hand; nor do I believe it to be ſo.
He does not own it to be his hand.
I do not ſay it is not my hand; but I do not remember any thing of it.
Read it Sir, pray you.
What is it you would read?
A Certificate under Oates hand of Mr. Smith's honeſty, not three days before the Tryal of the Five Jeſuits.
Read it, let us hear what it is.
Theſe are to certifie that William Smith is no Papiſt; and that he is upon good Service at this time for his King and Country; of which, I hope, thoſe that are Inquirers after Recuſants will take notice.
What harm is there in all this? I muſt needs ſay, I cannot comprehend what you would make of it.
This Protection was given Mr. Smith by Mr. Oates three days before the Tryal; but after he had ſworn him into the Plot in his Narrative.
I ſee not any Plot, for my part, that he ſwore him into, unleſs you mean Treaſon againſt the Houſe of Commons: for that is the Accuſation he made, that he ſpoke ſuch words of the Houſe of Commons. Pray read it again.
Well, and what is all this?
Is not this a ſwearing him into the Plot?
No, not that I ſee: it only gives an ill Character of him.
But he is accuſed as a Confederate with the Prieſts and Jeſuits.
Did I charge him, Mr. Attorney, with having any hand in the Plot againſt the Kings Life?
I only offer this as an Evidence that there was tampering.
You call it a being in the Plot; I ſee no ſuch thing.
And then he comes and gives him an acquittal under his hand, and then produces him as a Witneſs.
There can be no great matter in this Mr. Attorney.
Then my Lord, we'l call Mr. Smith himſelf, and he will tell you how Oates drew him in: Swear Mr. Smith,
pray acquaint my Lord and the Jury, how you came to ſwear at the former Tryal; by whom you were perſwaded, and how you varied from the Truth.
That is very nauſeous and fulſome Mr. Attorney, methinks in a Court of Juſtice.
What did you ſwear in the former Tryal? and was that true you did ſwear then?
I tell you truly Mr. Attorney, it looks rank and fulſome: if he did forſwear himſelf, why ſhould he ever be a Witneſs again?
'Tis not the firſt time by twenty that ſuch Evidences has been given.
I hate ſuch Preſidents in all times; let it be done never ſo often. Shall I believe a Villain one word he ſays, when he owns that he forſwore himſelf?
Pray my Lord give me leave; I muſt purſue my Maſters Intereſt.
My Lord, it was ever Teſtimony allow'd to be given, to detect a Subornation.
I am ſure 'tis not fit to be allow'd at any time: If he did forſwear himſelf in a Court of Record, in my opinion he is not to be receiv'd as a Witneſs any more.
We do only make this uſe of him, to prove that Oates did ſuborn him.
Pray call ſome other Witneſſes, if you have them, to contradict him; but do not offer to bring a man to ſwear that he did forſwear himſelf before.
My Lord, we give Evidence here of a mans being produc'd by Oates, to ſwear he was here in May 78. and he did make ſuch an Oath: now I hope, with Submiſſion my Lord, it is Evidence to contradict that Oath, if we can prove that he has confeſſed he was forſworn, and miſtaken in his Oath; ſuch Evidence perhaps will be of little value, yet Evidence it is.
Make it what you will, Mr. Sollicitor; I think it is of no value at all, nor to be admitted for the man to come and ſwear it himſelf: prove what you can by others.
Surely my Lord, this Confeſſion of his to others is of leſs value, than when we bring the Man himſelf to confeſs his fault; that Man himſelf coming and owning the thing, that he was miſtaken, with great ſorrow for it, ſure is a good Evidence.
Argue the matter as long as you will, Mr. Sollicitor, you will never convince me, But that he that has once forſworn himſelf, ought not to be a witneſs after that in any Caſe whatſoever. If any man tell me otherwiſe till Dooms-day, I cannot be convinc'd of it.
I go but to ask him this Queſtion, Whether or no what he ſwore were true?
Mr. Sollicitor, we are all of another Opinion, that it is not Evidence fit to be given.
My Lord, I muſt ſubmit it to you.
I tell you, Mr. Sollicitor, if you ſhould call him to know what it was he ſwore, and it does appear by any Evidence, or by his own Confeſſion, that it was falſe, you ought not to believe what he ſays even in that matter. And I think truly, for examples ſake, it ought not by any means to be admitted.
My Lord, I muſt ſubmit it to you, but then I humbly conceive, it will be in very many Caſes impoſſible to detect a Perjury or Subornation, if the Party ſuborn'd cannot be admitted to be a witneſs.
What good will the admitting him to be a witneſs do? for either what he ſwore then, or what he ſwears now, is falſe; and if he once ſwears falſe, Can you ſay he is to be believed?
My Lord, If a man come and ſwear —
Look ye, Sir, you have our Opinion; it has been always the Practice heretofore, That when the Court have delivered their Opinion, the Council ſhould ſit down, and not diſpute it any further.
Then we will go about the Buſineſs of Clay, and for that we will call Lawrence Davenport.
'Tis certainly againſt the Law to admit a man that has once forſworn himſelf to be a witneſs again in any Cauſe.
Swear Lawrence Davenport.
'Pray' give my Lord and the Jury an account how Clay came to be a witneſs, and by whom he was wrought upon to be ſo.
May it pleaſe you, my Lords and Gentlemen of the Jury, Mr. Oates came to the Priſon, I being then a Priſoner at that time in the Gate-houſe at Weſtminſter my ſelf, and having no other Employment, I had the government and care of ſome of the Priſoners for a livelihood, being in cuſtody; and at that time Mr. Oates, as I ſaid, when old Clay was in Priſon, did come there to viſit this Clay at ſeveral times; and coming there to viſit this Clay, up ſtairs he went to his Chamber, and deſired to ſpeak with him; and I did deſire your Worſhip, Mr. Oates, that you would go in to him, and you did go into his Chamber, and there theſe words you did ſpeak to him before the Trial of the five Jeſuits, That if he did not ſwear what you put to him, he ſhould be proſecuted as a Prieſt, which you did believe he would dye for.
What is this man's name?
Lawrence Davenport.
Did you hear him ſay ſo?
Yes, my Lord, upon my Oath I did hear him ſay ſo, and Sir William Waller was with him; and then he replied and ſaid, with a Proviſo, That you would give him his Gold and Silver that was taken from him, being then a Priſoner under My keeping in the Gate-houſe, and wanting his money; if you would do that, he ſaid, he had been a Rogue before, and he could not ſay what he might do.
Now make it appear that this Clay was ſworn at the Trial.
My Lord, afterwards I was Keeper to him under the other Keeper, and he had a Keeper to wait on him to Newgate Seſſions at the Old Baily; wherefore this Gentleman that is ſtanding there, Mr. Oates, comes to us, ſays he, Do not you trouble your ſelf about this Priſoner; let him alone with me, I'll ſee him at home again; and then the Jeſuits there did take their Trials: how it was I cannot tell; for we could not come into the Court: afterwards they went to the Fountain Tavern by Newgate to Dinner, and Mr. Oates and he went to Dinner together; we were below in the houſe waiting there till it was Night, and ſtill thinking that he ſhould come down again; but away went he home, and left us in the lurch; but indeed he did come home to the Priſon very honeſtly and civilly, becauſe he was civilly guarded.
Now, my Lord, we'll give you an account, That the next morning after this Diſcourſe betwixt Oates and Clay at the Gate-houſe, this witneſs told it to another that was a Priſoner there then too.
My Lord, I would ask this man a Queſtion, Whether he had the ſole keeping of Clay without any other Keeper with him.
There was no Keeper in the houſe, but my ſelf, where he lay, which was in Margaret's Lane, not in the Priſon, but in the Houſe.
'Pray' ask this Gentleman, why he did not come in and teſtifie this Diſcourſe, he ſpeaks of, when Clay was a witneſs.
I was not by when he was ſworn.
Did he not know he was a witneſs?
No, he ſays he did not go into the Court with you, he was not ſuffered to go in.
My Lord, I am a poor Trandeſman, and know nothing what belongs to the Law.
Come, 'pray' ſwear this man, Mr. —
'Pray' tell what Davenport told you, and when.
He came and told me the next day in the Priſon, where I was then, what Mr. Oates, and Sir William Waller had been tampering with Clay about, to make him ſwear for Mr. Oates.
What were the words he told you they ſaid to him?
It was, That he muſt ſwear, That Mr. Oates dined at Mr. Howard's houſe ſuch a day of the month, and Mr. Clay did ſay he knew nothing of the matter, but then Sir William Waller and Mr. Oates did reply to him again, here's your Choice; if you will not ſwear this, we will try you for a Prieſt, and hang you, and ſo Clay agreed; if he might have his money reſtored that was taken from him, he had been a Rogue before, and did not know what he might do.
Is this Evidence, my Lord?
Yes doubtleſs, very good Evidence.
'Tis only upon hereſay that he ſpeaks.
But that eſtabliſhes the other man's Teſtimony, this being told the very next morning; for he would not conceal it, it ſeems.
Now that Clay was ſworn at the Trial, you admit, Mr. Oates.
Yes, I do, he was ſo.
Then I think here's a plain proof of a Subornation.
You muſt obſerve how they apply this Evidence: They ſay, You are an ill man, not only as to ſwearing falſe your ſelf, but as to ſuborning others to ſwear more than they knew; and particularly as to this Clay, that you and Sir William Waller did threaten him, you would hang him up for a Prieſt, if he would not ſwear as you would have him; and by your Threatnings he was prevailed with to ſwear.
Is Mr. Clay in Court, my Lord?
Nay, I cannot tell where he is.
He was your witneſs, Mr. Oates; we expected you would have brought him.
I cannot tell where to find him, my Lord, now truly.
Call Mr. Howard.
Here he is, Sir, he is ſworn.
Mr. A•torney, you have not proved what he ſwore.
We are now about it, my Lord. Mr. Howard, 'pray' were you at the Trial of the five Jeſuits, or at Langhorn's, when Clay was ſworn as a witneſs for Dr. Oates?
Yes, I was at Langhorn's Trial, my Lord.
What was the Effect of his Teſtimony there?
He did ſwear, That he was with me and Mr. Oates at dinner at my Houſe, in May, in the year 77.
77 did he ſay, or 78?
Stay, I will look upon my Notes I took at that time.
Ay, do ſo to refreſh your memory, Mr. Howard.
It was May 78, my Lord.
'Pray' thus, Sir, Was he then at your houſe with Oates?
No, he was not there in May; Mr. Clay was with me and Mr. Oates both together in July 78. after the fourth day of July.
That is after the time he came to London from St. Omers.
You ſay very well; have you any more witneſſes?
My Lord, we muſt deſire that the 28th. Article of Mr. Oates's Narrative may be read.
That in order to this Command on April 24.78. Father Warren, Rector of Leidge, Sir Thomas Preſton, Baronet, Father Marſh, Rector of Gaunt, and Father Williams, Rector of Watton, and Maſter of the Novices, Sir John Warner, Baronet, Richard71 Aſhby, Rector of the Engliſh Seminary at St. Omers, being ſick of the Gout, could not go. But out of the ſaid Seminary, went Sir Robert Bret, Baronet, Father Pool, Edward Nevile. There were in all with the Deponent nine or ien, who met in London in Conſult with Thomas Whitebread, Father Harcourt Senior, and Father Harcourt Junior, John Fenwick, Baſil Langworth, William Morgan, John Keimes, Father Lovel, Father Ireland, Father Blundel, Richard Strange, Father Mico, Father Grey, and others to the Number of fifty Jeſuits met at the White-Horſe-Tavern in the Strand, where they plotted their Deſigns for the Society, and ordered Father John Carey, who was alſo there, to go Procurator for Rome; at which Conſult thus held in the Month of May, the Deponent was preſent to attend the Conſultors and deliver their Concernes from Company to Company; and then a little after they left the White-Horſe-Tavern and divided themſelves into ſeveral Clubs, and Companies: ſome met at Mr. Saunders Houſe in Wild-Street; others at Mr. Fenwick's at Aireſes his Houſe in Drury Lane; others at Mr. Ireland's in Ruſſel-Street near Covent-Garden, and in other places. All which, though in ſeveral Companies, five or ſix in a Company, did contrive the death of the King; and in order to which there were Papers ſent from Company to Company, which the Deponent did carry, cortaining their opinions of the timing their Buſineſs, and the manner how it was to be done, and within three or four days after the Deponent went to St. Omers with the Fathers that came from the other ſide of the water.
My Lord, we produce this to overthrow their Witneſſes, That ſpeak of his being here a week in May. Now Mr. Oates in this Narrative, ſays, That the Conſult ended the twenty fourth of April, and that three or four days after, he returned back to St. Omers.
'Pray' read that over again, where the names are; for the Witneſſes for the King ſwear, That Mr. Williams came over from St. Omers, but he here ſays he did not, I think.
I thought it had been otherwiſe; 'Tis darkly penn'd.
My Lord, I my ſelf heard him declare in many Trials here, and at the Old Baily, That all was finiſhed in that day, and he went away in a few days.
Mr. Attorney, you are miſtaken: For if you pleaſe, my Lord, the Conſult was not diſſolved in ſix or eight days, though they were not ſitting or acting every day.
'Tis not a difference of ſix or eight days that is contended for, but it is, Either Mr Oates or his Witneſſes do not ſwear true. If it were as Mr. Oates ſays, That ſix or eight days were allow'd after the twenty fourth of April, then it muſt be the fifth or ſixth of May, that he went to St. Omers; and then his Witneſſes, that ſay he was here the Latter end of May, can not ſwear true. And our Witneſſes, ſay he was all April and May, until the twenty third of June at St. Omers.
My Lord, Mr. Attorney does not apprehend the Evidence aright.
Well, you may make your Remarks by and by, and ſet him right if you can.
We have done our Evidence, my Lord.
Have you any more Witneſſes, Mr. Oates?
No, my Lord, I have not.
Then you muſt conclude, and ſay what you have to ſay to the Jury.
My Lord, I have one thing more and that is, A Copy of the Record out of the Houſe of Lords. It is in the Journal the twenty fifth of March, ſeventy nine.
My Lord, I have not the Book here, it was not ſpoke for.
But do you know this hand? Shewing him a Copy.
Yes, and I Believe it is a true Copy.
Read it.
Tueſday the 25 of March 1679.
It is the laſt Clauſe in the Journal of that day.
Reſolved, Nemine Contradicente, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons in Parliament aſſembled, That they do declare that they are fully ſatisfied by the Proofs they have heard, That there now is, and for divers years laſt paſt hath been a Horrid and Treaſonable Plot and Conſpirary, contrived and carried on by thoſe of the Popiſh Religion, for the Murthering of his Majeſtie's Sacred Perſon, and for ſubverting the Proteſtant Religion, and the Ancient and Eſtabliſhed Government of this Kingdom.
There is an Order to have that Vote printed and inſerted before the Form of72 Prayer for the Faſt. 'Pray' Sir, read the next Page.
Die Lunae 25. Oct. 1680.
Ʋpon Report from the Lords Committees for examining matters relating to the diſcovery of the late Horrid Plot and Conſpiracy, That Captain Thomas Bickley hath lately vilified Dr. Titus Oates at a publick meeting at Chicheſter to the prejudice of his Majeſtie's Evidence for the further diſcovery of the ſaid Plot: It is thereupon ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament aſſembled, That the Said Thomas Bickley be, and is hereby required to appear before their Lordſhips, in the Lord Privy-Seals Lodgings, near the houſe of Peers, on Wedneſday the third day of November next, at eight of the Clock in the forenoon. And it is further ordered that Alderman Exon and Alderman William Bury of Chicheſter aforeſaid, who were then preſent at the ſaid meeting, do likewiſe attend their Lordſhips at the time aforeſaid, to give Evidence of what they know concerning this Matter.
What of all this? we know hereupon Bickley was turned out of Commiſſion, and now Bickley is in again. But it ſeems as you had credit with ſome then, ſo you had not with others. Well, have you done now all?
Yes, my Lord.
If Mr. Oates will Summ up his Evidence, then I will do the ſame for the King, when he has done.
Well, what ſay you, Mr. Oates?
Now, my Lord, here is an Indictment preferr'd againſt me for Perjury and the Evidence they have given for the King, is this, 1. They have call'd Mr. Foſter, and he tells you that I was produced at the Seſſions-houſe in the Old Baily, where he was ſummon'd as a Jury man, upon the Trial of Ireland; and he ſays, That when I was produc'd at the Seſſions in the Old Baily as a Witneſs, and ſworn, (if I do remember Mr. Foſter aright in what he ſays) he did hear me ſwear, That there was a Treaſonable Conſult of Jeſuits upon the twenty fourth of April 78. at the White-Horſe-Tavern in the Strand; and he does further ſay, That I ſaid thoſe Jeſuits afterwards came to a Reſolution to kill the King; and that they ſeparated themſelves into leſſer Clubs; the Reſolution being drawn up by one Mico; and that I carryed it from Chamber to Chamber to be ſigned, and did ſee it ſigned. My Lord, I did ask Mr. Foſter, Whether I in my Evidence called it a Conſult, or a Traiterous Conſult. Now, my Lord, 'tis true I did call it a Traiterous Conſult; it is as true that I did ſwear there was ſuch a Conſult; and it is as true that I did ſwear this Conſult did divide it ſelf into leſſer Companies; it is as true that I did ſay I did carry that Reſolution about from Chamber to Chamber, and ſaw them ſign that Reſolution for murdering the King, I do not mean of this King, but of the late King. My Lord, the Evidence I think I nor no honeſt man ſhall need to be aſham'd of; I am not aſhamed to own that I repeated this Evidence ſeveral times, nor that I gave that Evidence upon Oath; for it is Truth, my Lord, and nothing but Truth, and I reſolve by the Grace of God to ſtand by it and confirm it with my Blood, if there be occaſion. My Lord, to Convict me of Perjury, they have brought a parcel of St. Omers Witneſſes, and theſe do ſwear that which they would have ſworn ſix years ago; but then the Court thought them not fit to be ſworn, not only becauſe the Law will not allow them, but becauſe of their Religion, that can diſpenſe with falſe Oaths, if it were for a good Cauſe, and that was the Remark my Lord C. Juſtice Scroggs then made of it. I ſhall not inſiſt much upon what they have ſworn, for that I ſuppoſe your Lordſhip and the Jury do very well Remember: But I have five things to Object to their Evidence; and I hope the Jury will take notice of my Objections, and make their Remarks upon them; for ſince you have heard the Evidence that is brought againſt me, it will be neceſſary for your Lordſhip to weigh the nature of theſe Witneſſes and the Value, that the ſeveral Juries of London and Middleſex had for them. 'Tis true there are ſeveral brought here now, that never were Witneſſes before; there are indeed other men, but of the ſame Religion and the ſame Intereſt, and therefore their Teſtimony muſt be of the ſame Value; I think your Lordſhip will allow me that: Therefore I Begin with their Religion, and that I take notice to be a great Objection to their Evidence, as I am adviſ'd by thoſe that are Learned in the Law. And I muſt appeal to the Court, whether a Papiſt in Caſe of Religion may be believed and received as a good Witneſs?
We muſt nor hear any of theſe Idle Expreſſions.
Do you think you are come here to preach, Mr. Oates?
I'll tell you, a Papiſt, except you'll prove any Legal Objection againſt him, is as good a Witneſs in a Court of Record as any other Perſon whatſoever.
But if your Lordſhips, I'll tell you my Lord Cook's practice was not to admit them as good Witneſſes.
Do not tell me of my Lord Cook's practice; the Law is otherwiſe; keep to the Buſineſs that you have here in hand; the Queſtion before us, Whether you were forſworn in Ireland's Trial or not? Anſwer that if you can; but you muſt not run out into Clamors and idle Extravagances.
My Lord, I demand it as my Right to be heard what I have to except againſt the witneſſes.
I tell you, you ſhall be heard when you ſpeak properly: But are you to determine what is Right, or what is Wrong?
I am to determine my own Right now in this point, and I inſiſt upon it, and demand it.
It may be preſently you'll tell us we have no right to judge of it.
Yes, my Lord, you have; but I hope I have right to urge it.
Urge what you will that is to the purpoſe, but then you muſt keep to the matter in hand, and not make ſuch idle Excurſions as theſe are.
I will keep to the matter, my Lord, if you will hear me.
So you ſhall, we'll make you keep to the matter, or we will not hear you at all: Do not think your Impudence ſhall ſtorm us out of our Senſes.
My Lord, I do inſiſt upon it, that theſe mens Religion is an exception to their Teſtimony, and a Papiſt is not a good witneſs in a Cauſe of Religion; and I deſire I may have leave to argue that as a Point of Law in my own defence.
No, Sir, it is no point of Law at all.
Then I appeal to all the hearers whether I have Juſtice done me.
What's that, why you Impudent Fellow, do you know where you are? you are in a Court of Juſtice, and muſt appeal to none but the Court and the Jury.
I do appeal to the hearers.
Take him away there; if you will not behave your ſelf as you ought, I can aſſure you the Court will do what they ought to do, and ſtop your mouth.
What you pleaſe, my Lord, I muſt make my own defence as well as I can.
You are here in Judgment before us, and are to appeal to us; we'll ſuffer none of your Common-wealth appeals to your Mobile; keep within the Bounds of Decency, and ſay what you can for your ſelf.
My Lord, this I move to the Court as one of my Objections to this Evidence given againſt me, That their Religion makes them no good witneſſes; eſpecially in this Cauſe.
I tell you that is nothing to the purpoſe, what their Religion is.
Mr. Oates, we come not here to diſpute Points of Religion, we come to try a bare matter of Fact, whether you are perjured or no.
I tell you a Papiſt is a good witneſs without a Legal Exception.
'Pray', Mr. Oates, is not a Papiſt as good a witneſs as a Diſſenter?
My Lord Cook would not admit a Papiſt to be a good witneſs in any Cauſe.
How, not in a Cauſe of Meum and Tuum?
No, my Lord, not in any Cauſe between Party and Party.
Where is that Opinion?
I'll cite you the Caſe, if you pleaſe, my Lord.
'Pray' let us hear it.
It is in Bulſtrod's Reports, the Second Part, 155. A Popiſh Recuſant is not to be admitted a witneſs between Party and Party. —
May a Presbyterian be a good witneſs, Mr. Oates?
Or would Mr. Colledge have been a good Witneſs, Mr. Oates?
I tell you this was my Lord Cook's practice.
You have our Opinion, and be ſatisfied with it; That Book ſays it was my Lord Cook's practice, and we think if that was his practice, his practice was againſt Law.
Then another thing I object to their Teſtimony, is their Education.
That's no Objection at all neither.
My Lord, they are bred up in a Seminary againſt Law, and for which their Friends are to be puniſhed.
So is every man living that's bred a Diſſenter, bred up againſt Law.
My Lord, I have not offered any Diſſenter as Evidence for me.
No, they are all no doubt of it very good People. Good-wife Mayo, and her Companions excellent Proteſtants without all queſtion.
My Lord, I humbly offer a Statute to your Lordſhip: And that is Law ſure.
Yes, a Statute is Law. What Statute is it?
It is 27o of Eliz. Cap. 2. The Law ſays there —
Come we will ſee what the Law ſays. Read the Statute he ſpeaks of.
It is Intituled an Act againſt Jeſuits, Prieſts and other ſuch like diſobedient Perſons.
My Lord, I deſire, That the Preamble of the Act may be read.
Whereas divers Ferſons called and profeſſed Jeſains, Seminary Prieſts, and other Prieſts, which have been, and from time to time are made in the Parts beyond the Seas, by or according to the Order and Rites of the Romiſh Church, have of late come, and have been ſent, and daily do come, and are ſent into this Realm of England, and others the Queen's Majeſtie's Dominions. —
This is nothing to this Buſineſs before us at all.
Does this Statute ſay they are no good witneſſes?
They own themſelves to be Educated at St. Omers, and that is againſt this Law expreſly.
What then, Do they own themſelves to be in Orders, Jeſuits and Prieſts, Then you might ſay ſomewhat to them upon this Law; but do not ſpend our time in ſuch Trifles.
I do not ſpend your time in Trifles, my Lord. It is my Defence.
Mr, Attorney, do you go on; for we will not ſit here to ſpend our time for nothing.
'Pray', my Lord, let me but ſhew this, I only propoſe one Statute more to your Lordſhip's Conſideration.
You may propoſe to read the whole Statute Book.
'Pray', my Lord, hear me out.
Speak then to the Buſineſs in hand.
It is the Statute made in 3d. King Charles the Firſt, Chap. 2.
It is nothing to the purpoſe.
I am adviſed 'tis very material for me.
I tell you it is not, and we'll not let your importunity prevail upon us to ſpend our time for nothing: There has been a great deal of time ſpent to no purpoſe already.
Then if you will over rule it, my Lord —
We do over-rule it: For it ſignifies nothing to this purpoſe.
'Pray', my Lord, be pleaſed to give me leave to offer their Judgments in Caſes of Conſcience, whereby they own they have Diſpenſations to ſwear Lies for the promoting of the Cauſe.
That is no Evidence neither.
This is very hard in ſuch a Caſe as this.
No, It is not hard, that what is no Evidence in Law, ſhould not be ſuffered to be given in Evidence.
It is Evidence againſt the poor Diſſenters, my Lord.
Indeed Sir, It is not Evidence againſt any one body in the World; if you will take my word for it, if you will not, I cannot tell how to help it.
Then I offer you one thing more, my Lord, and that is what was ſaid and done in the Caſe of the Earl of Shaftsbury, when he was charged with High Treaſon, and committed to the Tower of London, at ſeveral Seſſions in the Old Baily and at Hicks's Hall; they did move that they might have liberty to bring in an Indictment of Perjury againſt the witneſſes which did accuſe him of Treaſon, but now the Court there overruled thoſe Motions, and would not ſuffer my Lord of Shaftsbury's Friends to bring Indidictments of Perjury againſt him, becauſe they would not have the King's Evidence Indicted of Perjury, nor the Popiſh Plot called in queſtion; This is matter of Fact in the Old Baily.
And this is all idle too.
'Pray', my Lord, will you hear me.
But 'pray' Sir, will you hear me too. I tell you this is nothing to the purpoſe neither.
My Lord, I deſire to ſpeak but theſe few words then, as to my own Witneſſes I have produced. And the firſt is Cicely Mayo; and, my Lord, though it be your Lordſhips pleaſure, not to have that good opinion of her, as I think the poor woman does deſerve, yet I hope her Evidence, will have it's due Weight and Conſideration with your Lordſhip,75 and the Jury; ſhe ſays, ſhe ſaw me in Town in the Month of May: Now indeed ſhe could not be poſitive, what May it was, but ſhe ſaid it was the May before the Popiſh Plot broke out, that is before the Rumour of that Plot was ſpread abroad, and ſhe believes the Plot broke out in 78. But this ſhe ſays poſitively, ſhe ſaw me in the Month of May here; my Lord, ſhe comes to give this Evidence freely and voluntarily; a man that is a Knave is a Knave for ſomething, either out of Malice, or for Gain or Intereſt; but ſhe has no Reward given her, nor can hope for any, but in Love to Juſtice, without any byend or particular Intereſt; ſhe came here to teſtifie the truth, about her ſeeing me in London in May 78. The next Witneſs is Mr. Butler, he was then Sir Richard Barker's Coachman. He lived ſome years with him, as his Servant; but he is now ſet up for himſelf, and he ſays, that when he was about his Maſters Buſineſs in the Coach-yard, and fitting the Coach for to fetch his Maſter home from Putney, I came in, and this was in the beginning of May, in a diſguiſe; and he ſays he ſaw me a ſecond time in another diſguiſe. Then comes a third Witneſs that I called, and that is Page, and he came into the Hall, where the Patients uſe to wait for his Maſter, and there he met me, and ſpoke with me. Then I called Walker, the Miniſter, but it happens his Memory is not ſo good now, as it was heretofore, and indeed I cannot tell how to blame him; for 'tis ſo long ſince, that it is impoſſible for any body to remember the Circumſtances of times and places, that in ſome ſhort time after the Fact, might have been remembred with far greater Eaſe. I expected Sir Richard Barker might have been here, being Subpoened to Juſtifie the Evidence of theſe people; and I did expect that Mr. Smith would have been examined; but I perceived the Court tender of that point, as knowing it would then eaſily have been ſeen upon which ſide it was, that he was ſuborn'd, that is, to make ſuch a Confeſſion as Mr. Attorney would have hinted at.
Have you a mind to examine him, Mr. Oates; with all my heart. If you conſent to it, he ſhall be examined.
If you will, he ſhall be examined, it was for your ſake he was not.
It was to do you Right, that he was refuſed to be ſworn before.
Good Mr. Juſtice Holloway, you are very ſharp upon me.
No, I am not ſharp upon you; I think the Court did you a great deal of Juſtice, you have no reaſon to complain.
But, my Lord, this I ſay, The Evidence upon which I am now indicted of Perjury is the ſame, which was delivered ſix years ago at the Old Baily, at Whitebread's Trial firſt, and then at Langhorn's Trial, where were ſixteen Witneſſes then produced and heard againſt me: But then, my Lord, what Credit did they receive at Whitebread and Langhorn's Trials? Now if this Evidence that I gave was then to be beleived, tho oppoſed by ſo many Witneſſes, what new objection does riſe againſt it, which was not then hinted and received an anſwer? For as to all the Records that are brought out of the Houſe of Lords, they have not amounted to a Charge ſufficient to diminiſh any mans Evidence in the world; for as to the Narrative that is entred there in the Journal; I think I and any man elſe, that were concerned as I was, may very well defend the truth of it; and I do avow the truth of the Popiſh Plot, and will ſtand by it as long as I have a day to live, and I do not queſtion but the Jury upon Conſideration of thoſe Proteſtant Witneſſes, that I have here brought againſt theſe Popiſh Seminaries, will, acquit me of this Perjury. I leave it to your Lordſhip and the Jury to judge, and I hope thoſe paſſages of heat, that have fallen from me in Court ſhall not make me fare at all the worſe in your Judgement. I have called ſome Noble Lords to teſtify for me; but I find, either the diſtance of time has wrought upon their memories, or the difference of the ſeaſon has chang'd their opinion, ſo that now they disbelieve that, which they did believe before, and perhaps for as little Reaſon as —
As they believed you at firſt.
Yes truely, my Lord, for as little reaſon as they believed me at firſt; For I cannot expect that a man, who believes without a principal ſhould not recant that belief without a reaſon.
What do you mean by that?
I name no body.
But the Nobility, that are here, and that have been Witneſſes in this Cauſe, are all perſons of that Honour, that the Court is bound in Juſtice to take notice of, and vindicate them from your ſcandalous Reflections; but only I think that a Slander from your Mouth is very little Scandal.
Nor from ſome bodies elſe neither.
But, Sir, you muſt be taught better manners.
I find, my Lord, I am not to be heard in this Cauſe with Patience.
I think you do not deſerve to be heard at all.
I cannot tell how to help it, if you will not hear me.
Can't you ſay, what you have to ſay for your ſelf without Reflections and running out into ſuch Extravagancies.
My Lord, you will ſuffer me to offer nothing that is Material for my Defence.
Do you think it decent for this Court to ſuffer perſons of Honour, that by your own deſire were ſworn to give Teſtimony in this Cauſe, ſhould lie under the Reproach of your Tongue?
Good Mr. Juſtice Walcot, was there ever any man dealt with as I am, or had ſuch Evidence offered to be given againſt him? Here they offer to blacken me with the Imputation of that foul, infamous Crime of Perjury; and who are the Witneſſes to prove it, but Youths out of a Seminary; Sir George Wakeman, and my Lord Caſtlemain, known Papiſts, and perhaps Popiſh Recuſants, Convict too; as for my Lord Caſtlemain, the Record of his acquital is brought as a Charge againſt me, to prove that I was forſworn; and not believed at his Tryal; when all the World knows, it was becauſe there was but one Witneſs againſt him that he came of, and that was the Reaſon that was urged by my Lord C. Juſtice Soroggs at that very time, who would not admit Dangerfield to be a Witneſs, and reflected not at all upon my Teſtimony, but directed the Jury, for want of another Witneſs, to acquit him: Then my Lord, here is Wakeman brought and his acquital too; he ſwears all I ſaid againſt him was falſe; whereas, had it not been for two diſhoneſt perſons, one I have now in my ſight; I ſhall not name any names; we could at that time have proved five thouſand pound of the money paid to him, and that he gave a Receipt for it; but my Lord, this I am ſure of, if I had been brought in as a Witneſs in the Caſe of thoſe that ſuffered lately for the Presbyterian Phanatick Plot (as they call it) I had never been call'd in queſtion, if my Evidence had been falſe; but it is apparent the Papiſts have now a Turn to ſerve, and theſe Papiſts are brought in, the St. Omers Youths, to bear this Teſtimony, on purpoſe to falſify my Evidence, and to bring of the Popiſh Lords, that now ſtand impeach'd of high Treaſon for the Popiſh Conſpiracy; but, my Lord, I hope as the Court would never admit indictments of Perjury againſt the Witneſſes in that Caſe of my Lord Shaftsbury, ſo you will not admit it here; and if my L. C. Juſtice Jones were in the Right, who did the ſame thing in his Circuit, I hope I ſhall have that Right done me here. My Lord, it is not me they indict, but the whole Proteſtant Intereſt is aim'd at in this Proſecution; and hereby they arraign the whole proceedings of ſo many Parliaments, all the Courts of Juſtice, and the Verdicts of thoſe Juries, that convicted the Traytors that were executed; for my own part I care not what becomes of me, the Truth will one time or another appear.
I hope in God it will.
I do not queſtion it, my Lord.
And I hope we are finding it out to day.
But my Lord ſince I have not the liberty to argue thoſe things that were moſt material for my defence againſt this Indictment, I appeal to the Great God of Heaven and Earth, the Judge of all; and once more in his preſence, and before all this Auditory, I avow my Evidence of the Popiſh Plot all and every part of it, to be nothing but true and will expect from the Almighty God, the Vindication of my Integrity and Innocence.
May it pleaſe your Lordſhip, and you Gentlemen of the Jury —
My Lord, I have one thing to move to your Lordſhip; I deſire I may be brought up to morrow by Rule of Court to hear my Trial, that is then to be.
Ay, let him be brought up by rule to his Trial.
My Lord, I lie under very great affliction with the Stone and the Gout, and beſides that, I have lain in Irons theſe twenty one weeks; I beſeech your Lordſhip, that this Cruelty may not be inflicted upon me. My Lord, I am but hitherto a Debtor to the King upon a Civil Account; And if I ſhould be convicted upon theſe Indictments, I could then be but in Execution for a Treſpaſs; And I humbly conceive and hope the Court will ſhow me that Favour as to acquaint my keeper, that I ought not to be ſo handled.
Look you, for that I tell you again, what I have often ſaid, I expect from the Marſhal, that he keep you as he ought to keep you; I have heard that there have been abundance of Attempts made for your eſcape, and therefore the Marſhal muſt have the greater care of you.
Let any of thoſe Complaints be made out, my Lord, and I'll be contented to be uſed how they will.
I repeat it again, let the Marſhal have a care to keep you in ſalva et arcta Cuſtodia, according to Law.
If the Marſhal does otherwiſe than his Duty, inform againſt him, and take the Remedy the Law allows.
But the laſt night, my Lord, Ropes were brought into his Chamber, on purpoſe to give him means to eſcape, and here are the bundle of Ropes.
I know nothing at all of them, I aſſure you, my Lord.
Well, you have our Rule. Go on Mr. Sollicitor.
May it pleaſe your Lordſhip, and you Gentlemen of the Jury, I am of Council for the King in this Cauſe; which is upon an Indictment of Perjury againſt Titus Oates, the Defendant; and the Perjury charg'd upon the Defendant, is laid to be in his Oath at the Trial of Ireland, at the Old Baily; and it is thus, That he in his Evidence at that Trial, did ſwear, that there was a Treaſonable Conſult of the Juſuits, held at the White-Horſe-Tavern in the Strand, the twenty fourth of April, 78. and that he was there preſent. —
Ay, I was there.
You muſt be quiet, and let the Council go on without interruption.
And that they ſeperated themſelves into leſſer Companies and Clubs, and that the Jeſuits came to a reſolution to murder the late King, and that he, the Defendant, Oates, carried this reſolution from Chamber to Chamber, and ſaw it ſigned by them; now all this is laid in his Indictment to be falſe; for that in truth, he was not preſent at any ſuch Conſult of the Jeſuits at the White-Horſe-Tavern in the Strand upon the twenty fourth of April, 78. nor did carry any ſuch reſolution from Chamber to Chamber to be ſign'd as he had ſworn in the Old Baily at that Trial, and ſo has committed Wilful and Corrupt Perjury.
Gentlemen, the Evidence, that has been given to prove, that he was not preſent at any ſuch Conſult, nor did carry any ſuch Reſolution, has been by proving where he was at that very time, that he ſwears this Conſult was held, that is, that he was really at St. Omers, in parts beyond the Seas, and not in London; and to make out this, we have produced no leſs then twenty Wineſſes, that ſwear poſitively, and give you very many Circumſtances to induce you to believe, that what they have taken upon them to remember is really and effectually true.
Firſt, you have Mr. Hilſley, and he ſwears that he himſelf came away from St. Omers, the twenty fourth of April, New Stile, which is the fourteenth of April, Old Stile, which was a Sunday; that night he came to Callis, the next day he arriv'd at Dover, and coming up to Town towards London, the next day he met with Mr. Bournaby, who was then going to St. Omers. And he further ſwears, that at that very time, when he came from St. Omers, he left Oates, the Defendant, upon the place; this I ſay was the fourteenth of April: And for a Confirmation of this to be true, he left him there at that time. I would mention what two other Witneſſes do teſtify, and therein do verify what he ſwears; for they tell you, That at this very time when he came over, or within a day or two, but long before ſuch time as there was any occaſion to bring this to be a queſtion, he told one of them, in a diſcourſe that was between them, that he had left upon the place from whence he came, which was the College at St. Omers, an Engliſh Miniſter, whoſe name was Sampſon Lucy. —
My Lord, I beg I may have leave to withdraw, for I am very weak, and Ill.
Then make Room for him to go away, if he will.
And they give you an account, that the Defendant, Oates, went by that name there, and it is not denyed by him that he did ſo: And this is a Circumſtance greatly verifying Mr. Hilſley's Evidence. Then comes Mr. Bournaby, who ſears, That he met Mr. Hilſley when he came from St. Omers, about the ſixteenth of April, O. S. and the twenty firſt of April, O. S. he came to St. Omers; and that when he came there he found Oates there upon the place, this was the firſt of May, New Stile, and he gives you this circumſtance to ſtrengthen his Teſtimony, That he very well remembers, that upon the ſecond of May, N. S. the day after he came to St. Omers, Oates intruded into his Company and got himſelf acquainted with him; he ſays further, that upon the third of May, N. S. he particularly remembers Oates was in his Company there, and they went into the Garden and walkt together; he alſo ſays, he ſaw him the fifth of May, N. S. which is the twenty fifth of April, O. S. the day after this day aſſigned for the Conſult, with this Circumſtance, That he remembers to have ſeen him in the Rhetorick School, and ſo ſucceſſively afterwards he gives you a particular account down to Midſummer; after that Oates continued in the College at St. Omers, and then went away.
Then the next Witneſs we produce is Mr. Pool, and he gives you an Account, That upon78 the twenty fifth of April, 1678. N. S. which was the fifteenth of April, Our Stile, he came over here, and he left behind him at St. Omers, the Defendant Oates; for he particularly remembers, that he ſaw him there when he came away; ſo Hilſley left him the fourteenth of April; Mr. Pool came away the fifteenth of April, which is our twenty fifth, and left him at St. Omers, and does not remember, That he uſed to be abſent out of the College; and Mr. Bournaby finds him there the twenty firſt of April; ſo that particularly at the times, the other two came away, and Bournaby came thither, there he was, and there they ſaw him.
The next Witneſs is Mr. Thornton, and he gives you an account when Oates came thither firſt, and how long he ſtayed there; he ſays he came about Chriſtmas, 77. and there he ſtay'd till Midſummer-Eve, 78; and he tells you ſome particular days he ſaw him on; he ſays he ſaw him there on the firſt of May, N. S. and he ſaw him the ſecond of May, N. S. in Company with Mr. Bournaby, the next day after his Arrival there, wondring at their ſuddain acquaintance. And he adds a particular Circumſtance, why he remembers it was the ſecond of May; becauſe that day the Scholars at St. Omers, acted a Play, at which Oates had a Skuffle for a Seat; and he ſays he does likewiſe remember him to have been there, when Mr. Pool came away, which was the twenty fifth of April, N. S.
Then Mr. Conway, that was our next Witneſs, gives you an account likewiſe of Oates's coming to St. Omers about December, 77. and how long he ſtayed there, viz. till the latter end of June, 78. And he does not remember, that he lay out of the College above one Night, and that was in January. And he remembers particularly, that he ſaw him with Mr. Bournaby ſuch a day in May.
Then we brought another Witneſs, and that was Mr. Haggerstone, and he tells you, he had good reaſon to remember Mr. Oates, for he was in the ſame Claſſis with him; and this Gentleman gives an account particularly, that he remembers him to be there the next day after Mr. Bournaby came, and agrees in Teſtimony with all the reſt, that from Chriſtmas till Midſummer, he was not abſent out of the College, but one night.
We have another Witneſs, Mr. Beeston, and he remembers, that Oates was playing at Nine-pins the firſt of May; he remembers the ſecond of May to have ſeen him with Mr. Bournaby after the play was over; and that agrees with the other Witneſſes about his being in Bournaby's Company the Second of May; and he remembers likewiſe, that he himſelf was choſen Reader to the Sodality; but upon Mr. Oates's Importunity, he ſupplyed the place in Mr. Beeſton's Room, onely with this Reſerve and Condition, That Mr. Beeſton was to be Reader at any time, if Oates failed; and he gives you this particular account, that Oates did read, as he believes, every Sunday and Holiday, from the latter end of March, when he was choſen Reader, to within a Week of his going away; for that he did never read himſelf as he ſhould have done, if Oates had been abſent or failed to read.
We have another Witneſs, and that is Mr. Smith, and he ſwears his being there from Chriſtmas, 77 to Midſummer, 78. and he remembers particularly as to April and May, becauſe the twenty firſt of April, he himſelf fell ſick in the College, and went into the Infirmary, and remained there till the ſeventh of May; and he does remember that Oates viſited him very oft in that time in the Infirmary, and told him Mr. Hilſley was gone away, and Mr. Pool was gone away, and two or three other particulars, which happened in the College at that time; ſo that there is another Evidence, that is very ſtrong with Circumſtances to confirm the Teſtimony of the reſt; and he gives you a very ſatisfactory account of it, by ſhowing the reaſons how he comes to remember theſe things.
Mr. Price, who was our next Witneſs, has given you a Relation all to the ſame purpoſe of Oates's coming there at Chriſtmas, and of his going away at Midſummer. And he remembers particularly, that Oates was at St. Omers, when the Jeſuits went to the Conſult at London; for that there was a Conſult, and at that time, is acknowledged to be true; but not ſuch as he ſays, nor was he there; but he ſays ſome of the Fathers did call there in the way to England. And at that very time, and after, he ſaw him there. And Mr. Doddington gives you the ſame account.
Then comes Mr. Gerrard, and he tells you a Story to the ſame purpoſe; how long Oates was there, and when he came. And that the Second of May he remembers Oates was at the Play; and he remembers the twenty ſixth of May, Oates was there, which was the ſixteenth of May, O. S. And he is ſure Oates was there at that time, for this reaſon, that being the day whereon he himſelf was confirmed, St. Auguſtine's day; and Oates was confirm'd with him; and therefore he has reaſon to Remember Oates was at St. Omers.
79My Lord Gerrard of Bromeley was our next witneſs, and he gives you an account to the ſame purpoſe; and to the General Evidence, in which he confirm, the others, he adds this particular, That Oates uſed to read with a ſingular Canting Tone; ſo that he muſt needs remember him, and was ſo remarkable for other things that he could not be abſent without being miſſed, which he never was.
Then comes Mr. Morgan, who was there at that time, a Scholar; but he's now a Miniſter of the Church of England; and therefore not liable to Mr. Oates's great Exception of Religion; he confirms what all the witneſſes ſaid of the time of Oates's coming, and of the time of his going away: And particularly he ſwears, That when Mr. Hilſley went away, he was there; when Mr. Pool went away, he was there; and when Mr. Bournaby came thither, he was there. And this is not all; for there is ſomewhat more remarkable in his Teſtimony; for he tells you particularly he does remember, That upon the twenty fourth of April, O. S. the Day, Gentlemen, when Oates ſays he was at the Conſult in London, Oates was then at St. Omers. And the occaſion of his remembring this, he gives you an account of; for, he tells you, upon reading the Trial of Ireland, where Oates ſwears, That he was here at the Conſult the twenty fourth of April, 1678, O. S. all the College reflected upon it, and wondred at the Impudence of the man, that he ſhould dare to ſwear ſuch a thing, when all the College remembred him to be there all the while: And upon recollection of Circumſtances he himſelf did particularly recollect his own playing at Ball that very day, and having toſt his Ball over the wall, he borrowed Oates's Key to go into the Garden to fetch it: And this was thought of whilſt things were freſh, and every man Remembred this, or that, or the other thing to be done at ſuch a particular time.
Mr. Arundel, who was another witneſs, proves the general Teſtimony of the reſt, and agrees in ſome particular things; and all he ſays, is to the ſame purpoſe.
Mr. Chriſtopher Tubervile, he comes and ſwears Oates's being at St. Omers the fourth or fifth of May, which is the twenty fourth and twenty fifth of April, Old Stile. For that upon Mr. Pool's going away, he changed his Chamber in the College, and ſaw Oates divers days afterwards in his Chamber, and at the Door; and he knew that he conſtantly read in the Sodality, and that he left particularly the Sunday before he went away; which was about Midſummer, 1678.
There was another Gentleman, and that was Mr. Anthony Turbervile, who gives Evidence all to the ſame purpoſe; and this Circumſtance goes thorough all the Teſtimony of theſe Perſons, that there's ſcare any body can come to, or go out of the College, but it is known to all that are there, every man takes notice of it, 'tis the Common Diſcourſe amongſt them; and therefore they give this as the Reaſon of their Belief, That he was there all this while, becauſe they did not remember any thing that ſhould give them occaſion to believe Mr. Oates was away from the College from Chriſtmas till Midſummer, but only one time; and the remembrance of that does ſhow, That they do really obſerve theſe things; for they could all tell that in January he went to Watton, and ſtayed out one Night.
There is one witneſs more that is poſitive and particular, and that is Mr. Clavering, and he remembers Oates, by a very remarkable Circumſtance, was at St. Omers at the very time the Congregation is ſaid to be held in London; for he tells you there came a Perſon to beg money of him, and there was a Collection made in the Houſe; and this Perſon did deſire to ſpeak with Oates, who was then in the College; and whom it ſeems this Perſon had known in Spain; but Oates did refuſe to ſpeak with him, and did not come down to him. Thus he remembers ſuch an one came there, and when he was there, he was ſent to Oates to deſire him to come down to this man, and he would not. Ay but now how is this remembred to be at the time when the Congregation was held here in England? As to that, he gives this plain and full account, That it muſt be at that very time; for the Scholars did diſcourſe among themſelves, and were reckoning up what he had gotten among them, and what he had gotten at Watton: and finding that it was very inconſiderable that he had gotten at Watton, they talkt among themſelves what ſhould be the Reaſon, and concluded it was, becauſe the Fathers were gone over to England to the Congregation.
Theſe particular Circumſtances our witneſſes give you as the Reaſons of their particular Remembrances of the particular times: But, Gentlemen, you muſt take along with you thoſe General Conſiderations too that are offered, which do affect the whole time, from Chriſtmas till Midſummer. Firſt, That none can come or go, without being diſcourſed of in the College: Next, That much more Mr. Oates muſt needs be miſſed, than80 any other, being ſo Remarkable a Perſon, as they tell you, that ſcarce any week paſt without his making it remarkable by ſome ridiculous Action or another. They ſay he ſate ſingly by himſelf, at a particular Table, that no man could come into the Hall, but they muſt ſee him; and therefore if abſent, muſt needs miſs him. And yet they ſwear they do not ever remember him abſent, but that one Night; and if he had been abſent, they muſt needs have obſerved it, becauſe of all thoſe Circumſtances that have been reckoned up.
Theſe are the witneſſes, Gentlemen, that we have produced to prove this Charge upon the Defendant, two of whom are brought only to verifie Mr. Hilſley's Teſtimony; having heard it from him at that time that he had left Oates at St. Omers; when there was no thoughts of this Queſtion.
Now among theſe twenty witneſſes, there are not above two or three at moſt that were at either of the Trials before. They were never produced as Evidence, though indeed they proved the ſame thing that was teſtified by others then; but with many other Circumſtances and Particularities that were not before ſpoken of; ſome are now produced that were produced before, and the reaſon is, becauſe they are themſelves concerned in thoſe particularities which gave occaſion to the others to remember them.
Gentlemen, after the producing of ſo many witneſſes, and ſo ſtrong a proof; what is it that Mr. Oates has produced againſt it? His main Objection to their Teſtimony, is, There were ſeveral that came from St. Omers to teſtifie at thoſe former Trials, what theſe now ſwear, who were not believed, but I was believed, and the men were Convicted, Condemned and Executed upon my Teſtimony: But is that all he has to ſay? No, ſays he, I have likewiſe witneſſes to offer as a Counter proof to them, a poſitive proof that I was here in England at the time they ſwear me to be at St. Omers; and he ſays well; if that be proved, there is an end of the Caſe. Well, what is the proof? the witneſſes that he has have been theſe four, Ciceley Mayo, ſervant to Sir Richard Barker, Butler, his Coachman, Page, another of Sir Richard's Servants, and the Parſon Walker.
The Evidence of Page and Walker, though produced laſt by Mr. Oates, yet I crave leave to mention firſt, and ſet them out of the way. Page he remembers to have ſeen Mr. Oates in a Diſguiſe at Sir Richard Barker's; that is in Grey Cloths; but he is not certain as to the time, and he cannot take upon him to ſay, what time of the year, or what year it was, only he believes it was in May; and therefore that can be no ſufficient Evidence to contradict witneſſes, that with great particularity ſpeak to certain times. As for Walker, the Parſon, he ſaid he ſaw him between St Martin's Lane and Leiceſter Fields; but he cannot remember the time when neither: Nay, the remembrance he has of it goes rather to another time, than the time in queſtion; for being asked what Circumſtance he knew the time by, he ſaid, it was about a year and a quarter before the Plot was diſcovered, which muſt be in April or May, 1677. and that will do the Doctor no Service at all upon this Queſtion.
Now let us conſider Mrs. Mayo's Teſtimony; and the Oath that ſhe made was this, That when Oates came over into England, ſhe ſaw him at Sir Richard Barker's Houſe the latter end of April, or the beginning of May, and the week before Whitſontide; the latter end of April, or the beginning of May, was the firſt time that he came, that ſhe faw him; but that he came before, as ſhe heard, but the Coachman only ſaw him, and told her that Oates had been there; but the ſecond time ſhe did ſee him, and he went in and dined there in the Houſe: Sir Richard Barker was not there, but my Lady's Siſter, her Sons and Daughters were there; ſhe ſays, that ſhe ſaw him again a week before Whitſontide; that when he came the firſt time, he was in grey Cloths, a white Hat, and a ſhort Periwig: Afterwards he was in black Cloths, a pretty long Periwig, not very long, but the Periwig was brown; and theſe are the Circumſtances ſhe remembers to have ſeen him by.
Now let us ſee what Butler, the Coachman, ſays, he remembers about the beginning of May he ſaw Oates at his Maſter's Houſe in a Diſguiſe; the other ſaid it was the latter end of April, or the beginning of May: But I ſtand not upon that; but this he does ſwear, That the firſt time he ſaw him, Ciceley Mayo ſaw him too, that he was then in grey Cloths, a white Hat, but his hair was cut ſhort, and he had no Periwig on; afterwards he came in a cinnamon coloured Coat, and green Ribbons, and a long black Periwig: This is Butler's Evidence.
Now theſe two People's Evidence are utterly impoſſible to be reconciled, they contradict one another ſo much: Firſt, They contradict one another in this; ſhe ſays, The firſt time he came, ſhe did not ſee him, but the Coachman told her, he had been there; but he ſwears, That ſhe did at that time look out of the Window into the Yard, and did81 ſee him as well as he: Another Contradiction is this, She remembers the firſt time he came in grey Cloths, a white Hat, and a ſhort Periwig; the Coachman he ſwears he had no Periwig on, but his hair was cut ſhort to his Ears: Then again ſhe ſwears the ſecond time, he was in black Cloths, and an indifferent long Periwig, and the Periwig was brown; and the other ſwears he was in cinnamon colour Cloths, and a long Periwig, and it was a black one. Now thus you ſee the witneſſes contradict themſelves, and cannot be reconciled to one another.
But take one thing more, which is very conſiderable, wherein ſhe contradicts Mr. Gerrard; for ſhe ſwears he was here a week before Whitſontide, that ſhe is ſure of: Now that falls upon the nineteenth day of May; then upon the ſixteenth day of May, was the week before Whitſontide; now, that is a moſt Eminent Day, by the Teſtimony of Mr. Gerrard; for that happens to be the twenty ſixth of May, New Stile, and that was the day he was confirmed with Mr. Gerrard at St. Omers: And no man ſure can doubt, which of the two witneſſes is to be believed; and it cannot but be true, that he was there at that time; becauſe ſo remarkable a Circumſtance cannot be forgotten; and yet this Woman ſwears that he was here a week before Whitſontide, and that by Computation muſt be the time of his Confirmation: But, Gentlemen, another thing that I offer upon the Teſtimony of theſe witneſſes, is this; If you will believe it, he himſelf contradicts his own witneſſes, or they him, and one of them is forſworn: For he has ſworn the Conſult was the twenty fourth of April, and that three or four days after that was over, he went back with the Fathers to St. Omers: Now, this contradicts all that his witneſſes have ſaid: But he has given himſelf, as he thought, ſome little latitude; ſays he, the Conſult began the twenty fourth, but it held ſix or ſeven dayes longer. We will for this time admit it to be ſo, and give him the ſix days he requires; and yet after all, it will not come up to the time that his witneſſes ſpeak to; for to the twenty fourth of April, add ſix days, and that brings us juſt to the laſt day of April; and then take four days in May, to make up the three or four days after the Conſult was over, and we are yet at a great diſtance from the Whitſon week; for that was the nineteenth of May, and the week before muſt be the twelfth or thirteenth, and ſo it is impoſſible to be reconciled to Truth, what he and his witneſſes ſwear; either the Evidence that the Doctor now brings, muſt be a Contradiction to his own former Oath, or his Oath proves they are miſtaken; beſides the Contradiction that is between the witneſſes themſelves; for they vary in a great many material Circumſtances, which I have before reckoned up to you.
But, Gentlemen, falſe witneſſes are very often detected by little Circumſtances, though I muſt needs ſay theſe are not ſmall ones; for theſe are very remarkable things in themſelves, and great Contradictions to one another, and therefore 'tis impoſſible they both can ſwear true.
There were ſome other witneſſes that were produced by Mr. Oates formerly upon this point; one of which was Clay, the Prieſt, and he you hear is contradicted by Mr. Howard's Teſtimony, who not only tells you he was not at his Houſe, when he ſays he was; but ſhews that Clay was miſtaken in point of time: It was not in May, but in July: But that's not all, we have another Evidence, Gentlemen, to ſhow how this miſtake comes to paſs, and which will give a great light into this ſort of practice that has been uſed in this matter; for we have two witneſſes that give you an account how Oates and Sir William Waller were at the Gate-houſe with Clay, and there did threaten him, That unleſs he ſwore he dined with Oates at Mr. Howard's in May, they knew he was a Prieſt, and he ſhould be hanged: The man was ſomewhat cautious at firſt, for truly he knew nothing of the matter, but at laſt, upon condition he might have his money again that was taken from him; he had been a Rogue formerly, and he did not know what he might do. Now, we find preſently after, that he was in fact brought as a witneſs; what he ſwore, Mr. Howard tells you, and you have heard him contradicted in that point of time. For Mr. Howard ſays, it was in July; and then it was agreed, that Oates was in England; for our witneſſes tell you, that at Midſummer he came away from St. Omers.
So that, Gentlemen, the Evidence that was formerly produced for him, is not only taken away by poſitive Counter-proof, but there is fixt upon him, with great Infamy, the additional Crime of Subornation, by forcing People to ſwear for him under the Threats of being hanged; and we all know how ſuch People lay under great fears and terrors at that time.
There was another witneſs that was produced formerly for him; but I ſhall not take upon me to repeat all the particular Evidence that has been now given about that82 matter: In ſhort, our Objection to that Teſtimony lies thus; That Oates did ſwear in his Narrative, that Smith was a dangerous man, and imployed by the Jeſuits to ſtir up the People againſt the Government; that appears by Oates his own Oath. But it likewiſe appears, that afterwards they were reconciled, and that he gave Smith a Certificate under his hand, that he was a good Proteſtant, and a good Subject, and about Eminent Service for the King: Now, we ſee no reaſon hitherto, why Mr. Oates ſhould change his mind, after having ſworn him ſuch an ill man, all of a ſuddain to be ſo kind to give him his Protection, and ſo advantageous a Character, as that was in that Seaſon. But, Gentlemen, the myſtery is eaſily unfolded, if we go three or four days further in time, which brings us to the Trials of Whitebread and Langhorn; it ſeems Mr. Oates was then aware of that, which is now an Objection to his Teſtimony; for it was made an Objection at the firſt Trial of Ireland, That he was not at this Conſult, for he was then actually at St. Omers; but no witneſſes were there to prove it; but now he was aware that ſome were a coming over, and it concerned him to make ſome good proof if he could, that really and in truth he was here in London at that time.
And I cannot omit to take notice of what my Lord Chief Juſtice was pleaſed to obſerve and object to him now; It is a wonder a man ſhould be here in Town ſo long; a man that had much Acquaintance, as it ſeems he had, a man that went about freely and publickly, as his own witneſſes ſay he did, ſhould be ſeen by no body, but theſe few, ſhould not be able to give an account, by any body, where he lodged, at any one time in this Interval. Nay, by no Circumſtances that muſt occur to his own Knowledge, to be able to ſhew where he lodged, is very ſtrange; though it ſhould be that he did lodge in the Houſes of thoſe that would not come to give Evidence, as he alleadges, yet it is almoſt impoſſible, but there muſt be ſome other Circumſtances to prove his being here, beſides the Evidence of the Landlord of the Houſe where he lodged; but he gives no account where he was lodged, and whom he converſed withal, but theſe People only; and that they ſhould ſee him, who were not his Intimates, and none elſe in the World, is to me one of the moſt ſtrange things that can be conceived.
Now Gentlemen, when he has given no manner of ſatisfaction, that he was here, and is by twenty witneſſes ſworn not to be here; What is it that he ſays to all this? why, he doth inſiſt upon it, that his Credit muſt not be now Impeached, becauſe that once he had the fortune to be believed, and ſome men have died and ſuffered for it; as if no Perjury were to be puniſhed, but that which is unſucceſsful; whereas the reaſon why Perjury is taken notice of in the Temporal Courts, is only becauſe of the miſchief that it may do: Shall it then be no Crime when a man has done the miſchief, when the fear of that miſchief was the ground of making it a Crime? that is a moſt monſtrous way of arguing. And yet this would Mr. Oates have look like an Argument, that becauſe he has been believed in his falſe Oaths, and men have ſuffered by his Perjury, and he has been ſucceſsful in his Crime, that Succeſs has protected his wickedneſs from puniſhment. This I confeſs is a new way of arguing; and ſuch as none but Mr. Oates could certainly have invented.
But, Gentlemen, to contradict this, we have ſhown you, that as he has had the fortune to be believed; ſo he has likewiſe had the fortune to be disbelieved. For there has been produced as many Records of Acquitals, where he was an Evidence, as there have been produced Convictions upon his Teſtimony; ſo that he has been as often disbelived as believed.
Whither then does he betake himſelf next? he has called a great many witneſſes to give you, as Evidence for him, an account what Opinions at that time the Houſes of Parliament, the Courts of Juſtice, and the Juries had of his Evidence; and then inſiſts upon it, that now to call his Credit in queſtion, is to arraign the Juſtice of the Nation, the Wiſdom of both Plouſes of Parliament that believed him, the Honeſty of the Juries that convicted thoſe whom he accuſed, and the Integrity and Underſtanding of the Judges who were Learned, Wife and Juſt men; and with great earneſtneſs he asks the queſtion; Why now at this time of day ſhould this be called in queſtion, which received ſo much Credit and Approbation ſo long ago, by the good opinion that all forts of men had of it at that time? And, Now to queſtion this, he would have thought to be a caſting a Blot upon the Wiſdom of the Nation, and an arraigning the Juſtice of it; when, if the thing be duly conſidered, the not puniſhing this hainous offence with the utmoſt ſeverity that the Law will allow of, now, that theſe Circumſtances appear to make it plain and evident, would be a greater piece of Injuſtice and Reproach rather to our Nation, than any ways a Reflection on the Juſtice of it.
83Gentlemen, when we conſider the Circumſtances of this Caſe now I do verily think it will appear to be a very ſtrange and wonderful thing to us, that ever any man ſhould have believed him. And it is a ſtrange Conſideration to reflect upon, to think what Credit he had at that time. But withal conſider, Gentlemen, could any one imagine, that it were poſſible for any man on Earth to become ſo impudent as to dare to expoſe himſelf before the High Court of Parliament, the great Courts of Juſtice, and there tell a moſt Infamous Lye for the taking away the Lives of men? the greatneſs of the Attempt was a great inducement to the belief of it, becauſe no man could be preſumed to dare the doing of ſuch a thing, if he had not a Foundation of truth to build upon. And when he had thus made his diſcovery, and that of ſuch a nature too, a moſt horrid, bloody and traiterous Conſpiracy to murder the King, to overturn the Government, to maſſacre all the Proteſtants in the Kingdom, and to deface the very name of the Proteſtant Religion. What was more natural than that the Parliament ſhould take all imaginable care to prevent the accompliſhment of ſo great a miſchief. And conſider too how much eaſier it was for him to relate his Evidence in a continued Story, than afterwards it was to maintain it, when it came to be examined and oppoſed by them that were accuſed, who beſt knew wherein, and by what means to prove him falſe.
Gentlemen, the Care the Parliament took to diſappoint any deſigns of this nature, and the means they uſed for the ſecurity of the King and Kingdom, and the Preſervation of our Religion and Lives, (which I cannot but obſerve was praevious to the Trial of any one Offender, that was tryed and convicted upon this Evidence) muſt needs put the whole Nation under great apprechenſions of danger, and make the way much eaſier for him to be believed, as by ſad experience we found it did. Under theſe circumſtances came thoſe men to be tryed, with this further (as we cannot now but think) that there were ill men at work, that laboured to improve thoſe fears and Jealouſies, that had already poſſeſt mens minds; the wonder then will be the leſs, if men under ſuch diſadvantages, tryed by men under thoſe fears and apprehenſions, had the ill Fortune to be convicted. But when men had a little overcome their fears, and began to conſider his Evidence more calmly, the ſcene was changed, Oates loſt his Credit, and the men were all acquitted. Nor is this Proſecution any reflection on the Proteſtant Religion, whoſe cauſe he falſty aſſumes to himſelf. No, Gentlemen, the Proteſtant Religion had no ſhare in that invention. It needs not the ſupport of a Lye, no not the moſt plauſible Lye, much leſs of one ſo Infamous as this does now appear to be. It is rather a Vindication of our Religion to puniſh ſuch Offenders as they deſerve, and the proper way to maintain the Juſtice of the Nation, and wipe off that reproach this mans Perjury has brought upon it.
Then Gentlemen of the Jury, the Evidence has been very long, and it cannot be expected after ſo much time has been ſpent in this Cauſe, and ſuch a difference of teſtimony, and eſpecially conſidering that the teſtimony has met with frequent interruptions, and I may ſay ſome part of it delivered in great Confuſion, it cannot be thought or imagined, I ſay, that I ſhould be able to remind you of the ſeveral particulars that concern this Caſe, and may be neceſſary to be obſerved about it. But, Gentlemen, I am ſure by the Knowledge I have of the moſt of you, you are perſons of great Underſtanding; ſo that what may be omitted by me, I queſtion not, but your own abilities will ſupply; I confeſs I am much ſhortned in my Labour by the pains, that Mr. Sollicitor has taken to ſumm up the Evidence to you, and without all doubt has done it with all Faithfulneſs to his Maſter, and with great Right to himſelf. I could not hear much of what he did ſay; but you, who were nearer and did hear all, which I could not do, your Judgments will direct you to lay that weight upon it, which it deſerves, and which the Law will allow; for Gentlemen I am bound to tell you, that you are to lay no weight upon any Allegations on the one ſide or on the other, or what is obſerved to you by the Court, further than is ſupported by the Teſtimony that has been offered.
Now, Gentlemen, I think it not amiſs for me (before ſuch time, as I enter upon the Conſideration of the particulars, and reminding you what I take to be Evidence in this caſe, and what not) to clear one point, that this perſon Oates, the Defendant, againſt whom this Indictment of Perjury is brought, has endeavoured to inſinuate on purpoſe to gain himſelf a Reputation, which if he could acquire this way, would add a greater Reproach to the Juſtice of the Nation, than it has contracted already by giving too much Credit to ſuch Profligate Wretches, as have too lately appeared among us. The Objection he makes and inſiſts ſo much upon; ſays he, I was believed very much before, I can produce you the opinions of the Judges, that declared themſelves very well ſatisfied with my Evidence, and the Verdicts of Juries, two or three, that convicted men upon my Teſtimony; and84 rot only that, but here were likewiſe three or four Parliaments that did not only believe that Teſtimony, (or rather Narrative; for I cannot call that Teſtimony which was given before the Houſe of Commons) that I gave, but did declare their Satisfaction of the Truth of what I ſaid, which Satisfaction and Belief of theirs did produce thanks from both Houſes to me for giving this Teſtimony.
But all this while, what Mr. Sollicitor ſaid upon this point, is a plain and a full anſwer to it: If in caſe upon a ſuddain information, the King, the Parliament, the Courts of Law, and Juries, were ſurprized into this Belief, as not imagining there could be a pack of ſuch Villains, that could be wound up to that height, as theſe Fellows have been; that there could be ſuch an horrid Impoſture, as this Fellow, that ſhould make ſuch attempts, unleſs there had been ſome truth in it.
Therefore the ſurpriſe of the thing, at that time, might obtain a Belief; but, God forbid, that that Belief which was ſo obtained, ſhould protect the Party believed from being called in queſtion for the falſhood of that Teſtimony, which was the ground of that Belief. It was hardly credible that any Perſon could be ſo wicked as to declare ſuch impudent falſities as theſe; but, God forbid, that we ſhould continue longer under the ſame blindneſs and deluſion, the whole matter is now laid open and detected. Therefore, Gentlemen, if you are ſatisfied in your Conſciences, and do believe upon the Teſtimony and Evidence that has been given here this day, that thoſe very things that were ſo much believed before, were credited upon the ſurpriſe of a ſuddain diſcovery, or the boldneſs of the undertaking, yet now do plainly appear to be falſe; then be it, I ſay, upon your Conſciences, if you let this falſhood go unpuniſhed: It is a Charge upon us who are upon our Oaths as Judges, and who muſt anſwer to the great Judge of all the World for our Judgments; and 'tis likewiſe a Charge upon you that are ſworn to try this Cauſe, and muſt anſwer, as well as we, for what you do in it, not to have regard to any thing that was done before upon that hurry and ſurpriſe, but ſeriouſly to weigh and conſider what is ſworn now, and from thence to make a Concluſion, whether you are not ſatisfied that Innocent Blood has been ſpilt by the means of this Fellow: Nay, in this Caſe 'tis a contracting of much more Guilt than ordinary, as it is Murder done under the Forms of Law, and common Methods of Juſtice; that men ſhould take away the Lives of their Fellow Creatures, by Perjury and Falſe Accuſations, is of ſuch dreadful Conſequence, that if the Juſtice of the Nation ſhall be afraid to have ſuch matters detected, there would be an end of all the Security we have of our Lives, Liberties, and whatſoever is dear to us.
Gentlemen, the Juſtice of the Nation lies under a very great Reproach abroad; for this particular thing, and we muſt be, all of us, that have any Concern for the Honour and Good of our Country, uneaſie, till this matter be throughly ſearched into, and impartially determined; and I take it to be a Caſe of the greateſt Importance to the Settlement of the Kingdom, for the Credit of our Laws, for the Honour and Juſtice of our Kingdom, that ever came in Judgment in any of our Courts of Juſtice. And therefore as you reſpect your own Conſciences, and the Obligation of that Oath you are now under, and as you would be thought to bear any regard to the Peace, Honour and Good of your Country, take care to examine ſtrictly and impartially into the Merits of this Cauſe, and weigh the Evidence which has been given on all ſides: Be not at all diſmayed with the Apprehenſions of Clamour or Calumny, from any ſort of People whatſoever, for doing your Duty; neither be led away by the Inſinuations of what was believed formerly; for you hear the reaſon which might make Oates be believed then; but it is incumbent upon you to enquire, whether you have not ſufficient reaſon to be ſatisfied what the truth now is.
And, Gentlemen, I take my ſelf to be the more obliged to take ſome pains in the preſſing a ſerious and Impartial Conſideration of theſe things upon you, becauſe I cannot but ſay, my Blood does curdle, and my Spirits are raiſed, that after the Diſcoveries made, I think, to the ſatisfaction of all that has attended this Day, to ſee a Fellow continue ſo Impudent, as to brazen it out, as he has done this Day; and that there ſhould appear no more Shame and Confuſion than what was ſeen in the face of that monſtrous Villain that ſtood but now at the Bar; the pretended Infirmiy of his Body made him remove out of Court, but the Infirmity of his depraved Mind, the Blackneſs of his Soul, the Baſeneſs of his Actions ought to be looked upon with ſuch Horror and Deteſtation, as to think him unworthy any longer to tread upon the Face of God's Earth: You'll pardon my warmth, I hope; for it is Impoſſible that ſuch things ſhould come before any honeſt man, and not have ſome extraordinary Influence upon him.
85Gentlemen, as to the Merits of the Cauſe, you have the poſitive proof of many Witneſſes, whoſe Teſtimony, I ſhall by and by, as well as I can, repeat to you, but pray you firſt give me leave to obſerve ſomewhat, as to ſome points, that have been ſtarted at the Barr, as, Whether a Papiſt can be a Witneſs: Now ſuppoſe all theſe perſons, that come here to teſtify this matter againſt the Defendant were Papiſts, as they are not, except you can take it upon your Oaths and Conſciences, that all theſe men are guilty of voluntary and wilful Perjury, you muſt find the Defendant guilty.
As to their difference in Religion, which Oates ſo much hung upon, I muſt tell you, every Papiſt or Roman Catholick, call them how you will, except the contrary be made appear by a Legal Exception; I mean ſuch, as would take off the Teſtimony of one, that were not a Papiſt, is as good a Witneſs in a Court of Juſtice, as any Proteſtant whatſoever; we are not come here to controvert points of Religions, but to try a bare matter of Fact; ſo that all that ſtuff, that you have heard here this day from the Defendant, and thoſe Inſinuations, that he made about their Religion, on purpoſe to caſt dirt and filth upon all the Teſtimony, that they have brought againſt him; muſt ſignifie nothing with you at all. If in Caſe ſuch Doctrine happen to prevail, as he has this day preached, then it is in the Power of any Villain, to ſwear any Miſchief whatſoever againſt a Roman Catholick, and that Roman Catholick has no way to vindicate himſelf, nor to make the Truth appear. We have no ſuch Exceptions to Witneſſes in our Law; every man till it is made to appear; that his Credit is forſeited, may and ought to be received, as a Witneſs to give Teſtimony in any Cauſe; ſo that all that matter is of no Import at all.
And, Gentlemen, I am the rather minded to hint this unto you, becauſe he has inſinuated ſomething out of the Trials of Grove, and Pickering, and Ireland, which was in December, in the Year 1677 at which Trial, Whitebread and Penwick, who had pleaded to the ſame Indictment, were brought on to Trial; but becauſe there was but one Witneſs againſt them, the Court diſcharged them for that time, and they came not again to Trial, till the Month of June or July hereafter, when they wereconvicted and executed; now between that time of Ireland's Trial, and the time, when Whitebread and the reſt came on to Trial again, ſays Oates, they had ſufficient time to have brought all their Witneſſes from St. Omers, to teſtify this buſineſs of my being there, having notice by the former Trial, what Evidence was againſt them; but all the Witneſſes they did bring, which were about fifteen or ſixteen, were not ſufficient to countervan the Teſtimony, that Oates gave of his being here in Town, and thereupon they were convicted, condemned, and afterwards (I am ſorry to ſay it) executed.
This is the Objection he makes, but at the ſame time I muſt repeat what I ſaid before, when ſuch a diſmal Story as this was told, when he had the Confidence to relate it before, in the Houſes of Parliament, and there obtained Credit; no wonder, if in that hurry, all of that perſwaſſon were look'd upon with an Evil Eye; and the conviction of thoſe that were at that time accuſed were too eaſie.
We muſt remember the apprehanſions ſome were under, of our Religion being to be ſubverted, our Government to be deſtroyed, our King to be murdered, our Throats to be cut by the Papiſts, to that height, that this very Fellow, Oates, was ſo much credited, that all other people almoſt were below him, and greater Reſpect ſhown to him, than to the Branches of the Royal Family. Nay it was come to that degree of Folly, to give it no worſe name, that in publick ſocieties, to the Reproach and Infamy of them be it ſpoken, this profligate Villain was careſſed, was drunk to, and ſaluted, by the Name of the Saviom of the Nation. O prodigious madneſs! that ſuch a Title, as that was, ſhould ever be given to ſuch a Proſtitute Monſter of Impiety, as this is.
Good God, whither were we running, when many eaſſe people were ſo ſtrangely wrought upon by this Impoſtor, and when the Viſlainous and black deſigns of ſome Evil Inſtruments amongſt us, could prevail ſo far, as to deceive almoſt a whole Nation into the Belief of ſo horrid a Falſhood; even at the ſame time, that a hidden Treaſon too deeply contriv'd was carryed on amongſt us!86 but, God be thanked, was not too lately diſcovered. The Conſpirators had a fair Game of it, whilſt this Fellow was believed, and they needed no other means to accompliſh their Deſign: But when he was found falſe, and the pretended Plot, had loſt its Credit in the World, what is their next ſtep? why, then they enter into that Black and Bloudy Conſpiracy, from which it hath pleaſed God lately to deliver us.
I ſpeak this the rather, becauſe I know there are in my Eye ſeveral perſons, whoſe fears of Popery, made them give Credit to ſuch Villains as theſe before: But when it pleaſed God to open their Eyes, and the falſe miſt vaniſht, they found a Real Conſpiracy, againſt the Perſons of that Bleſſed King, lately dead, and of our Gracious Sovereign, now Living, carried on under the pretence of that falſe, but ſo much credited diſcovery, and now God be thanked all our Eyes are open. And I hope, as we are ſecured from what we ſo vainly dreaded, ſo we ſhall not be afraid to have Villainy detected, and the greateſt mark of Infamy that can be, put upon it.
Yes, Gentlemen, there was a Conſult, and there was a Conſpiracy againſt the Life of our King, our Goverment, and our Religion: Not a Conſult at the White-Horſe in the Strand, but a Cabal and Aſſociation of perfidious Rebels and Traitors, who had a mind to embroil us in Bloud and Confuſion, but, God be thanked, it had not its deſired Effect; the ſame ſort of Villams, were Parties in this Conſpiracy, that had too great a hand in the late great Rebellion, which we to this day feel the ſmart of, and they had a mind to make uſe of the like Inſtruments, as they did before, to bring us into the like miſery, as we were before involv'd in.
And is it not a prodigious thing, to have ſuch actions as theſe to day defended in a Court of Juſtice, with that Impudence and Unconcernedneſs, as tho he would Challenge even God Almighty to puniſh his Wickedneſs, and Blaſphemouſly bleſſes God, that he has liv'd to do ſuch wonderful Service to the Proteſtant Religion; and is ſo obſtinate in his Villainy, as to declare, he would venture his Bloud for the Confirmation of ſo impious a Falſhood: and indeed to ſpeak the Truth, he makes no great venture in it; for when he had pawn'd his immortal Soul, by ſo perjur'd a Teſtimony, he may very eaſily proffer the venturing of his viſe Carcaſs to maintain it.
Gentlemen, having thus ſaid (and I could not forbear ſaying of it) give me leave to put you in mind of what lies before you now to be tryed. Firſt, this Indictment takes notice, that there was an Indictment, taken before the Commiſſioners of Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol-delivery at Hicks's Hall, of High Treaſon againſt Whitebread, Fenwick, Ireland, Pickering and Grove, and that Indictment, and the whole Record is proved to you by Swift: For I muſt tell you as I go along, what proofs there are of all the particulars, and you, upon Conſideration of all that is alledged, are to be Judges, what is ſufficient proof to convict the Defendant of the Crime, that is laid to him; which is wilful and corrupt Perjury. The Indictment, Gentlemen, ſets forth the Oath, that Oates did make at Ireland's Trial, and then averrs it to be falſe: For the Oath that he did take, that ſtands thus, That he did ſwear he was preſent at a Conſult, held at the White-Horſe-Tavern in the Strand, the twenty fourth of April, 1678: That he did ſwear, That it was there reſolved to murder the late King: How that that Reſolution was carryed by him from Chamber to Chamber, that is, to Whitebread's and Fenwick, and Ireland's Chambers, and ſaw them ſign this reſolution there; and the Aſſignment of the Perjury, is, That he was not preſent at any Conſult, 'tis not that there was not any ſuch Conſult, though it appears by the Evidence that there was none ſuch, but that he was not preſent at any Conſult at all held there at that time.
Now, that he did make ſuch an Oath, is proved by a worthy Gentleman, Mr. Foſter; a Gentleman known to you all, that live in the City of London; and he did truly make that Remark in the beginning of his Teſtimony, that any honeſt man in his place would have done, That he was one of thoſe unfortunate men, that tryed Mr. Ireland; for though a man do go according to his Conſcience, as to be ſure there is no queſtion to be made of it, but all theſe Jury men did in finding that Verdict; yet when I come to find, that the Evidence, upon which I convicted thoſe men, is detected to be falſe; and that upon my Verdict the perſons were87 executed; tho no Guilt of their Bloud is really contracted by me; yet I cannot but think my ſelf unfortunate, that I was, though innocently, an Inſtrument of their death: and there is never an one of you, but would have thought your ſelves unfortunate, if you had convicted men upon ſuch a Teſtimony, which though you believed then, yet afterwards you ſhould have reaſon to conclude was falſe. And yet Oates would have you think, that becauſe they believed him when he was a Villain, and not known to be ſo, you muſt believe him, notwithſtanding his Villainy is now diſcovered; for that is all the Argument this Learned Doctor has a mind to impoſe upon you by.
Gentlemen, Mr. Sollicitor has been very particular, in giving an Account of the whole Evidence, and then it comes to this, which is the natural queſtion in the Caſe, Whether upon the Teſtimonies, that have been given to you, there does remain ſo much as a doubt, what Verdict you ought to give; for I confeſs, were it a thing in the leaſt doubtful, matters of Perjury are ſo nice and tender, that we and you ought to be Cautious how we convict People for Perjury in doubtful matters; but if it be a thing without doubt, and plainly Evident, that there was a Verdict thereupon, adds to the Guilt; becauſe the Juſtice of the Nation is impoſed upon; the God of Heaven deliver every honeſt man's Soul and Conſcience from ſuch Guilt. For my part, I would not for the Univerſe, have the leaſt Guilt of Innocent Blood lie upon me.
Then, Gentlemen, to prove what Oates ſwore is not true, you have no leſs than twenty two Witneſſes, that ſwear directly he was not here in London the twenty fourth of April, 1678. But it may be that it is not ſuch a Poſitive Teſtimony as the Law requires to prove a Perjury; but then to ſwear directly that he was in another place at that time, is a poſitive contradiction to his Evidence; and this has been teſtified by the Oaths of twenty two Perſons, againſt the credit of whoſe Teſtimony there is no Objection at all really made, but only Impudence; and that ſhadow of an Objection, They are all Papiſts, and I am a Proteſtant; and truly a wonderful credit it is, I muſt needs ſay, for the Proteſtant Religion for to have ſuch a Learned and Pious Supporter, as Mr. Oates, to be of that perſwaſion; but it is certain there was a Judas amongſt the twelve Apoſtles, and there are Raſcals of all perſwaſions. And truly I take it makes never the more for his advantage, nor the Honour of our Church, that he is pleaſed to call himſelf by that name, which he, and ſuch as he, have brought into ſome Scandal and Reproach, by ſetting themſelves up, as the great Pillars of it; but we know Doctor Oates has been very Liberal to himſelf, he has given himſelf Baptiſm, and given himſelf the Doctor's Degree, and now he gives himſelf the Title of the Reforming Proteſtant, Mr. Oates. We have Proteſtant Shooe-makers, and Proteſtant Joyners, and Proteſtant Atheiſts, and all ſorts of true Proteſtant Raſcals; but it becomes us and you to aſſert the Honour of our Religion by diſowning any Fellowſhip with ſuch Villains, or their Actions.
Gentlemen, the Method that was taken, gives you an exact account in point of time, as to this whole Buſineſs. Firſt, ſays Mr. Hilſley, I left him, in time the twenty third of April, New Stile, at St. Omers, and I am ſure I ſaw him there then, which is the thirteenth, Old Stile; the twenty fourth of April, New Stile, which is the fourteenth, Old Stile, I came from St. Omers, I did not ſee him there that morning, but I my ſelf came to Callis, it being Sunday; and I ſtayed there till Sunday in the Afternoon, and all night. I came on Munday in the Afternoon to take water at Callis, and from thence went to Dover. And from thence the next day I went towards London; but I ſtayed four or five days by the way before I came to London; but then there is this Circumſtance that you muſt take along with you, Gentlemen, That at this time, one Mr. Bournaby was coming from London, and going to St. Omers, and met with Mr. Hilſley in his way towards London; ſays Hilſley, I came afterwards to Town, and that was upon the Munday following, which happens to be the twenty firſt or twenty ſecond of April, Our Stile; but this I do remember very particularly,88 ticularly, which makes his Teſtimony to be true, and not dreſſed up for this occaſion, ſays he, I told one Osborn at that time that we had a pretty fellow at St. Omers, that went ſometimes by the name of Lucy, and ſometimes by the name of Oates, a Miniſter of the Church of England; and there he comes and gives an account of his ridiculous childiſh Actions, and what a remarkable Fellow he was; and this, ſays he, I told to Osborn.
Now to make this good, you have one Mr. Dorrel, who tells you there happened a Diſcourſe, where he was preſent, between his Mother and Mr. Osborn, about Religion; and amongſt other things, Osborn did ſay, Mr. Hilſley had told him he left Oates at St. Omers when he came away from thence; and Mr. Osborn, he comes and ſays, I remember I did tell Mr. Dorrel and his Mother, at that time that Mr. Hilſley did tell me this Story: ſo that here are theſe two Witneſſes which ſupport Mr. Hilſley in that Circumſtance of the time of his coming away, and his Relation of Oates being left behind him, and that this was related about the twenty firſt or twenty ſecond of April.
Bournaby is the next Perſon that was produced, and he ſwears he met Hilſley by Cittinbourn; and he happens to ſet out for St. Omers the eighteenth of April, Our Stile, and to come thither to St. Omers the twenty firſt; and he ſwears poſitively that he was there the twenty firſt, twenty ſecond, twenty third, and was there the twenty fifth day of April, Our Stile; and he does poſitively affirm, that all thoſe days he ſaw Oates there at St. Omers; that Oates intruded into his company at his firſt coming; and that he and all the other Scholars wondred at the confidence of the man; and he particularly remembers that he was with him at a Publick Entertainment that was there the twenty fifth; and if ſo, then it is impoſſible that what Oates has ſworn of his being at the Conſult the twenty fourth of April, Our Stile, can be true; and except you can imagine Mr. Oates to fly from St. Omers the twenty fourth day in the morning, and he at the Conſult and back again at night, which is more than he would have believed, becauſe he ſwears the contrary, you muſt conclude that what he ſwore was falſe.
The next Witneſs is Mr. Pool, and he comes and ſays, he was there at St. Omers, and he came over from thence the twenty fifth of April, and that was the day after Oates ſwears the Conſult of the Plot to be here; and all the reſt of the Witneſſes do directly ſwear, That at the time that Pool went from thence, Oates was there; ſo that the Teſtimony of Pool is fully and poſitively confirmed; and Pool gives you a reaſon, why he came over, which was the death of a Brother of his, and upon a Proſpect of an Eſtate he came into England, which likewiſe is a reaſonable Circumſtance why he ſhould remember the time, becauſe he had ſuch Inducement to come over hither.
The next, Gentlemen, is one Thornton, and he comes to the Month of May, to the firſt and ſecond of May, Their Stile, which was the twenty firſt and twenty ſecond of April. Our Stile, and particularly he is ſure Oates was there upon the twenty ſecond of April, Our Stile, that is the ſecond of May, Their Stile. For ſays he, there was an Action or a Play of the Scholars; and I can tell you how I remember Oates was there, Oates had a mind to have a place to ſee the Play, which he had no pretence or title to; and he had a ſcufftle with ſome body about it; and therefore I remember by that token, that he was there at that time.
Now, Gentlemen, it is not eaſie to be imagined, that ſix or ſeven men ſhould agree in their Teſtimony in all thoſe Circumſtances, which in themſelves are but minute; yet when offered as Reaſons to induce mens Remembrance, muſt be allowed as good Reaſons; and yet this to be thought to be but a made Story. If Sir Richard Barker's Coach-man, and Mrs. Mayo had had any ſuch Circumſtances to ſupport their Teſtimony, they would have had much more Credit.
89Then there is one Conway; and it is very obſervable what he ſpeaks of: for he was there all the while that they ſay Oates was there, and he gives you an account that he ſaw him with Bournaby the firſt time he came over, and agrees with Bournaby in this, that he wondred much at his confidence, and did think that he was very well known to him before: He ſwears Oates came in thither about the beginning of December 77, and he was not abſent, ſays he and ſeveral more, any one night, except in January once at Watton, till he went away in June 78. Nay, they are ſo preciſe in their memory for very good reaſons, becauſe they are ſo regular in their Societies, and keep a ſtrict Order, each has his fixed place in the Refactory, where all the Socii or the Members of the Colledge do meet; and becauſe this Fellow was an old Fellow, older than the reſt, and likewiſe was a Dunce, therefore he was ſet at the Dunce-Table in every bodies view, becauſe he was a Blockhead, and too old to keep company with the Boys; ſo that though perhaps one of thoſe young Follows in a mixt Society may eſcape the view, and be abſent without being miſs'd, yet Remarkable Mr. Oates is not ſo eaſily forgotten, that us'd to ſit by himſelf. And as that Noble Lord my Lord Gerrard of Bromeley ſays, he has a particular Face, and a particular Tone; and there was more reaſon to remark him than any other, both upon the account of his Perſon and of his Actions; ſo that I muſt needs ſay indeed, it is not a downright and poſitive ſwearing, but their Teſtimony is given with deliberation and recollection of ſuch particular Circumſtances as may reaſonably induce any unprejudic'd perſon to give credit to it.
The next Witneſs, Gentlemen, is Haggerſton, whoſe Evidence is wonderful particular, and very material, as to the Circumſtances that accompany it. For you are to obſerve, that in theſe Colledges ſome are of the Sodality, and ſome are not; and ſome are of ſuch and ſuch Claſſes or Forms, and others of other. Now this Gentleman and Mr. Oates were of the ſame Form, and he does particularly remember that he was ſetting up for a Preacher, as he has an excellent knack that way; and he tells you how ridiculous he made the late King in a Sermon; that he halted between two Opinions, and there ran a ſtream of Popery between his legs; and ſuch-like precious ſtuff he vented. And to fix it to be about the ſame time that is now in queſtion, he ſays, he particularly remembers it was when he was Reader, when Mr. Oates was, it ſeems, the Buffoon to the Society, or as I may call him, the Jack-pudding to the Colledge, that us'd to make them ſport, and was guilty of ſo many ridiculous things, that they could not but put particular Remarks upon him.
Next, I take notice that this perſon ſays, there were two perſons, Williams and Marſh, that were qualified to give Suffrages in the Congregation, that is, they were paſs'd eighteen years ſtanding, and did go over: For that there was a Conſult, is not denied, nor that it was in London, nor that it was upon the 24th of April; but they ſay, it was a Triennial Meeting, which they us'd to have once in three years for the choice of ſome Officers to manage the Affairs of the Society; as for the choice of a Provincial, and other perſons that they were to ſend upon their Errands, in order to the ſupport of their Society; ſo that under the colour and countenance of what was in it ſelf ordinary and uſual, and that happened to be at that time, Oates, who had heard ſomewhat of it, and that it was the 24th of April, and that ſuch and ſuch were to be there, he upon that Hearſay, as ſhould ſeem at St. Omers, does feign and contrive this pretended Conſpiracy.
The next is one Beeſton; and it is very material too that he ſwears: For beſides what he teſtifies, that from the time of his coming, which was in December 77, he was not abſent till the 23th of June, when he went away; and for the time in queſtion, he very well remembers his being there, by this Circumſtance: ſays he, I was choſen to be Reader of the Sodality in the month of March, but then Oates comes and gets the Office out of my hands; but ſtill with me there was that benefit reſerv'd, that if he ſhould at any time fail of Reading there upon a Sunday, or a Foly-day, I was then to have read, and to have ſupplied his place. Says he, I was there from March till the time Oates went away in June; and Oates read there that very Sunday before the time in June that he went away. And I am ſure I heard him read every time; and in cafe he had not read every time, I muſt have read in his abſence: but I did not read at all, during that time.
Now, Gentlemen, when a man is to ſucceed or to ſupply the abſence of another in an Office that is peculiar as to the Charge incumbent upon the Officer, and confiderable as to the profit of it, that muſt needs make an impreſſion upon the mind, and give a man a more exact remembrance of the thing, and therefore I reeommend it particularly to your obſervation.
90The next is one Mr. Smith, and he ſays he ſaw Oates there all the time: And as to one part of it, when he himſelf was in the Infirmary, Oates went to viſit him every two or three days; nay, and about ſuch a time in May, ſays he, which was about the beginning of May, Oates being then in the Infirmary not well, the Doctor and he had a pretty Dialogue together, and Oates ſpoke falſe Latine to the Doctor, for he ſaid, Si placeat Dominatio veſtra, in the beginning of his Complement; this he did particularly ſay was the expreſſion that this excellent Schollar uſed to the Phyſician at his firſt application to him, and all the whole Colledge took notice of that piece of his Learning.
The next is one Price, and he tells you, he was there all the time that the others ſpeak of; he remembers him very well, and particularly ſays, I am ſure Oates was there the 11th of May N. S. which will be the firſt of May O. S. Becauſe, ſays he, I know he was ſoundly beaten that day upon a quarrel that he had there; this particularly he ſpeaks to, beſides his remembrance of the other Circumſtances in concurrence with the former Witneſſes.
Mr. Doddington ſwears the ſame, and Mr. Gerrard alſo ſwears the ſame, with that other particular circumſtance that Mr. Sollicitor repeated to you, which was of Oates being there upon the day of Confirmation the 26th of May N. S. the 16th of May O. S. and he is ſure of it, becauſe he was confirmed along with him, and therefore it is impoſſible he ſhould forget it: And my Lord Gerrard, who was the next, gives this reaſon upon his remembrance of all the forementioned particulars, that he always took ſpecial notice of the man for his Canting Tone, his Phyſiognomy, and remarkable Behaviour.
Then there is Mr. Morgan who is no Papiſt, but a Miniſter of the Church of England; now Mr. Oates was angry with all the reſt, becauſe they were Catholicks; but what has he to ſay to Mr. Morgan who is a Proteſtant? Why the truth is, there are none of them to be believed, becauſe they ſwear againſt him, and really he ought to be permitted to give that reaſon, or it is like to go very hard with him; for if in caſe you believe but a third part of the Teſtimony that has been given, it is enough to do his work. But what ſays Mr. Morgan? truly he comes up to the 24th of April particularly, and he tells you how he remembers it; and the firſt occaſion he had to look into it was, they being all ſurprized at St. Omers at what Oates had Sworn, and Mr. Morgan recollecting with himſelf, did remember that that very day he was playing at Ball within the Colledge, and happened to toſs his Ball over the Wall into the Garden, and not being able to recover it any other way, he ſpyed Oates walking and looking into his Book, and therefore he deſired him to lend him his Key, and by the help of that, he went in and fetched his Ball; and this was the very day that Oates ſwore he was here.
Mr. Arrundel ſays the ſame: the two Turberviles ſay the ſame; and one of them is poſitive to have ſeen him there either the 24th and 25th, or 23d and 24th of April O. S. which is the 3d and 4th, or 4th and 5th of May N. S. and if it were either of theſe days, it cannot be poſſible he ſhould be here at the Conſult.
The next is Mr. Clavering, and I cannot but particularly take notice of what he has ſworn: he ſays Mr. Oates was there all the time that the reſt ſpeak of; but it ſeems particularly about the time of the Congregation in London: there comes in a Stranger that was poor, and this Gentleman Mr. Clavering made a Collection for him; and it was talked of in the Colledge as the reaſon why he had not ſucceſs in his Collection, becauſe the Fathers were gone to the Congregation. Nay, and yet farther ſays he, I do remember particularly that Mr. Williams and Mr. Marſh did go over to the Congregation, but Oates did not, for I do remember when Williams and Marſh came back again, I had ſome diſcourſe with Mr. Oates about the Congregation: He came to me and deſired to know of me what account I was able to give of the matter of that Meeting after the Conſult was over. Now had Mr. Oates been there and been a perſon of that great Truſt that he had ſworn himſelf into, he needed not ſure have asked Mr. Clavering at St. Omers what the buſineſs of the Conſult was at London, where he himſelf had been, but the other had not.
There is beſides Mr. Capley, another Witneſs, Mr. Cooke, that ſpeaks particularly of the 30th of April, that he was ſure Oates was there then, becauſe of the Proceſſion, and becauſe he walked by himſelf in it; and Wright the laſt Witneſs gives a general account, but ſpeaks to no particular time.
And now, Gentlemen, after all this Evidenc, Viva voce, you muſt give me leave to hint Teſtimonium Rei, an improbable Oath was that which Oates owns he made, if it be conſidered in all its parts. Can any man believe that fifty perſons ſhould meet together in a Tavern in London, and theſe fifty perſons ſhould come to a Reſolution to kill the King and91 ſubvert the Government, and alter the Religion; and that this Conſultation being drawn up in the Tavern (for ſo he ſwears it was) they ſhould ſever themſelves into leſſer Clubbs and Companies, and take care that none ſhould ſign when they were altogether and among themſelves, but muſt have it carryed up and down from one mans Chamber to another and find no body to truſt with this Affair, that if diſcovered, muſt ſubject them to preſent deſtruction, and ruine their whole party, but onely Mr. Oates, who was none of their own Order, nor does appear to be of ſuch Credit amongſt them? Can you believe any men ſhould be ſo void of ſenſe and reaſon, that of fifty together, and thoſe reputed as ſubtile as any ſort of men whatſoever, there ſhould not be one man of common underſtanding that ſhould take care for a more rational Management of ſo great and hazardous an Undertaking? when they were met together, and might have diſpatcht it in a quarter of an hour, they ſhould ſeparate themſelves into ſeveral parts of the Town, and truſt a Reſolution of that nature in Mr. Oates pocket, in whom if they had had more Confidence than they ſeem to have, yet it was folly and madneſs to give him that opportunity of deſtroying all them, and making himſelf; were there no other Evidence but the very Teſtimony of the thing, it would go a very great way with me I confeſs; but I muſt ſay withal, you are Judges of this Fact upon a ſuperadded Teſtimony of Twenty two Witneſſes Viva voce, I think it leaves the thing without any doubt.
Gentlemen, the Anſwer given by the Defendant to this Charge is very fallacious; and though he puts ſuch a Countenance upon it, as though his Witneſſes were ſuch perſons of Credit, that nothing could be objected againſt them yet he is certainly very much miſtaken in that: He has produced but two potitive Witneſſes, and thoſe two as poſitive as they are in their proof, are likewiſe poſitive in their Contradictions of one another, and what they have ſaid is left to your Conſideration.
The one is a Coachman, the other was Sir Richard Barker's Houſe-keeper; they indeed do ſay Sir Richard Barker's Wifes Siſter, and his Nephew, and his Daughter, and his Neeces, and a worſhipful Knight, and I know not who, that the old Woman tells me are gone into my Countrey, were all there at the ſame time, and no body comes to teſtifie it, but onely this Coachman and this old Woman: Theſe, Gentlemen, are things fit to be thought of.
But now let us conſider how they agree in their Evidence. Says the Woman, I ſaw him not till the beginning of May, but I am ſure he was there before once or twice. And how does ſhe know that? becauſe the Coachman told her ſo, and he came there ſeveral times, but he did Dine there but once; and when he came there the firſt time ſhe ſaw him, he came in ſuch a diſguiſe, and he had a ſhort Perriwig, and a kind of ſhort white Coat, and a white Hat; but when my Coachman comes to ſwear, he tells you the firſt time he ſaw him, the Woman ſaw him too, that he had his own Hair, and cut cloſe to his cars, that made him look, as the young fellow told her, like a Quaker. And when I asked the Coachman, Are you ſure that Benjamin the young Fellow did ſee him the firſt time you ſaw him there? he told me, No; but he was ſure the old Woman did look out of the window and ſee him, which ſhe denies. I then asked him how often he dined there? he tells you ſeveral times, and there were ſuch and ſuch, and the old Woman did ſee him dine there ſeveral times; which ſhe denies that ſhe ever ſaw him dine there above once: And I take notice of one of the Evidence, the Coachman, he gives but an odd ſort of reaſon for his remembrance: In February ſays he, my Lady died, and my Maſter was ſick at Putney, and Oates came into the Yard while I was cleaning my Coach; and I am ſure it was where the Coat of Arms hung over the door becauſe he asked me about my Ladies death, and therefore it muſt be in May, when, for ought does appear to the contrary, it might be in any other Month after the Eſcutcheon was up; and in the other circumſtances there is no certainty at all: So that it is plain, theſe Witneſſes ſwear according as their humour leads them, and not according to any remembrance they have of the thing.
And I rather believe it, becauſe the third Witneſs, that is Page the Apothecary, that uſed to make up Sir Richard Barker's Medicines, gives an Evidence contrary to both thoſe, he cannot remember the year poſitively or particularly; but I'll tell you how he thwarts and contradicts the other peoples Teſtimony; for he remembers he came in ſuch a diſguife, but he believes no body ſpoke to him but himſelf, becauſe he found him walking in the place that was for the common reception of the Patients, and he asked for Dr. Tongue, and he not being within, he went away very diſcontented: and ſo now theſe three Witneſſes ſeem to contradict one another; and the laſt Witneſs Walker, who is the Parſon, he ſays nothing to the matter; for it does plainly appear the time which he ſpeaks of, which92 was about a year and a half before he was call'd to teſtifie at the five Jeſuits Tryal, muſt be in the year 77, and not in the year 78, which is the Queſtion here, which muſt be before he went firſt to St. Omers.
Gentlemen, the other part of Mr. Oates's Defence has been upon this Topick: ſays he, I have been believed heretofore, the Parliaments have given me credit; and to prove it, he has call'd ſeveral Noble Lords and Perſons of Quality. The firſt was my Lord of Devonſhire, who ſays he cannot remember any particulars of his Evidence, 'tis ſo long ſince; but he remembers the Parliament, upon the Evidence given of the Plot, did make ſuch Votes as we do all know of. And there were a great many people that gave credit to his Teſtimony, who, God be thanked, are of another opinion now. And my Lord of Clare ſays, he was not in the Houſe of Lords at the beginning of the Diſcovery, and cannot remember any thing in particular. But my Lord of Huntingdon was a little more particular; and Mr. Oates began to be angry with him, becauſe he ſpoke ſo much: ſays he, I remember Mr. Oates was examin'd in the Houſe of Lords, and was believed there, becauſe they did believe he ſpoke truth at that time; but now upon conſideration of the Contradictions and Falſities of his Evidence, I cannot but ſay, I do believe him, ſays he, to be a great Villain, and that he has been guilty of ſpilling innocent Bloud. And this Noble Lord ſpeaks with great Honour and Conſideration: And truly I believe, if every man that is here were to ſpeak his mind, my Lord has delivered the Opinions of us all, and many thouſands more in the Nation.
Mr. Oates call'd next my Lord Chief Baron, my Brother Gregory, my Lord of London, Sir George Treby, Mr. Williams, and my Brother Dolben. But they all tell you, they are able to give no particular Anſwers to his Queſtions; and this was the ſum of his Evidence.
To this Mr. Attorney General has given a Reply of Evidence that truly is of very great moment. Firſt, here is produced Sir George Wakeman, whom Oates accuſed of High-Treaſon, and he ſuffered his Tryal and was acquitted; ſo that as well as the Jury had given credit to him in the former Verdicts, ſo ſays Mr. Attorney, I muſt ſpeak likewiſe for the credit of that Verdict that did disbelieve him, becauſe though he did ſwear as roundly and briskly up to the matter as he had done before, yet when he had not the hurry and ſurprize of his Diſcovery to ſupport him, his Villany was detected, and the Innocent acquitted. And beſides the Record of the acquittal, here is the Perſon himſelf, who is now under no dread or danger, having ſtood his Tryal and being acquitted; and he takes it upon his Oath, in the preſence of the Great God the Searcher of Hearts, That whatſoever Oates ſwore againſt him at his Tryal, was every tittle of it falſe: And this Acquittal of his, being after great and mature conſideration, is an Evidence of anothergets quality than the Verdicts of the other Convictions.
Next to him, is my Lord Caſtlemain, a Perſon of very great Honour; and he gives an account he was arraigned of High-Treaſon at this Bar, and upon his Tryal Oates was produced as a Witneſs againſt him, and there he ſwore he met with my Lord Caſtlemain in Lincolns-Inn-Fields, and great familiarity there was between them, ſo that my Lord could not truſt him in a leſs affair than the Plot; and away he goes with him to Fenwick's Chamber, there to talk about a Deſigne of killing the late King. Mr. Oates, of all mankind, muſt be the great Repoſitory of this Secret; but the Jury then being Perſons of great Underſtanding and Integrity, did not believe Oates, but acquitted my Lord Caſtlemain: And he does here take it upon his Oath, backt with all the Imprecations of Evil to himſelf that a man can uſe, That there was not one word of truth in Oates's Teſtimony; nor did he ever ſee Oates in his life, till ſuch time as he was taken up upon his Accuſation. Now are here two perſons of Honour and Quality, that upon their Oaths do particularly give you an account, as in the preſence of Almighty God, that Oates has twice forſworn himſelf againſt them.
Gentlemen, there is notice to be taken of the Journal of the Houſe of Lords; and though it is true for the ſake of the Precedent, and to ſecure the Juſtice of the Nation, we did keep them ſtrictly to their proof, that it was upon Oath. And as to the buſineſs of Smith, though we do believe the thing in our private judgments, yet we thought it not fit to be permitted that perſons ſhould upon their own Oathes confeſs themſelves to be guilty of Perjury, and afterwards give Evidence againſt others; for ſuch are not to have the countenance of ever being Witneſſes again: yet by the Records of Parliament, and other Evidence, there is enough to make the matter aimed at clear.
For it is clear by his Narrative, that Oates did firſt ſwear, as far as he could well ſwear, to bring him into the diſpleaſure of the People: for that was his way to intimidate all he93 had to do with, and thereby force them to comply with his Deſignes. And there was no more plauſible Accuſation at that time, than to accuſe a man for ſaying ſomewhat againſt the Parliament, or being in a Combination to ſubvert the Proteſtant Religion. But you ſee when he comes to have his own turn ſerv'd, then this man upon whom he had fixed ſuch an odious Character, is really no Papiſt at all, but engag'd in ſervice for his King and Country, and has Mr. Oates's Paſſport, a thing of great advantage to him at that ſeaſon. This the Kings Council make uſe of with great reaſon, as an Evidence of Tampering: for the man has altered his opinion of one he had before accuſed, and now brings him as an honeſt to give Evidence for him. And this, ſay they, muſt be intended to be done by Practice and by Threats.
And the rather, Gentlemen, for that you have an account by Witneſſes ſworn, that there was one Clay a Popiſh Prieſt that lay in Priſon at the Gatebouſe, and while he was there, Oates and Sn William Waller came into the Priſon to him, and tampering with him, ſays Oates, I hear there are ſome St. Omers Boys that intend to teſtifie that I was at St. Omers, when I ſay I was at London; but you muſt ſwear, that you din'd with me at Mr. Howards in May 1678: or if you will not, you know I know you to be a Prieſt, and I'll hang you. Says Clay, Where is my Silver and Gold that was taken away from me? And we all know Sir William Waller was wonderful good at the fingering of Gold; he us'd to take away broad Pieces as Popiſh Reliques, becauſe of the Croſſes upon them. Says Clay, Give me my Gold again, I will ſwear for you; I have been a Rogue before, and I may be a Rogue again. And accordingly a Contract is made for him to ſwear directly that Oates and he were together at Mr. Howard's houſe in May 78. This very Fellow that tells you now the ſtory, told it the next morning to another man, who has likewiſe ſworn the ſame. Then is Clay conveyed by Oates to the Old-Baily, and there ſwears, being thus threatned and ſuborn'd, That in May 1678 he and Mr. Oates dined together at Mr. Howard's houſe, and you have Mr. Howard produc'd, who does ſwear that Glay did ſwear ſo; but indeed he was not there with Mr. Oates at dinner till July after.
This, Gentlemen, is direct Corruption and Subornation; and if a man will be a corrupt Knave, and endeavour to ſuborn Witneſſes to ſwear that which is falſe, he is the more likely to ſwear falſe himſelf. Beſides, that you are to take notice, here is his own Narrative produced, where you have it ſworn by himſelf, That he went back to St. Omers about the beginning of May, and was there all the month of May, and in June till the latter end of it. Then all this while either Mr. Oates or, his Witneſſes, are perjur'd in the Caſe: He ſays, he ſtay'd but three or four days in England after the Conſult was over, and then went ſtreight back again to St. Omers. Which muſt be the firſt week in May; but if you believe his two Witneſſes, he din'd with them ſeveral times after that: and ſo it is apparent, ſome of them are guilty of groſs and foul Perjury.
Now, Centlemen, I cannot but reſort back to the Objection that I made at firſt. 'Tis ſtrange to me, that a man that came upon ſuch a deſigne, ſhould go publickly about the ſtreets at noon-day, though in a diſguiſe, yet he was known. But if you take the perſons time to be in the year 1677, then it is eaſily reconciled what they did ſay of their ſeeing him in ſuch a diſguiſe; and ſo all their Teſtimony may ſtand together, and perhaps they may miſtake in a point of time, though not in the ſubſtance of their Evidence; and I would out of charity conclude it to be ſo.
But I will ſay, if they are to be taken ſtrictly to the year 1678, it is monſtrous to imagine, that we ſhould have no body brought to let us know where he lodged, where he eat, with whom he convers'd for all that time.
Gentlemen, I have detained you the longer in this matter, becauſe I take it to be of ſo great weight, wherein the Juſtice and Honour of the Nation are ſo much engaged, and it was therefore fit this Cauſe ſhould be tryed in the moſt ſolemn and publick manner, in order to vindicate the Nation from the Reproach and Calumny of Injuſtice and Oppreſſion. And ſure I am, if you think theſe Witneſſes ſwear true, as I cannot ſee any colour of objection, there does not remain the leaſt doubt but that Oates is the blackeſt, moſt perjur'd Villain that ever appeared upon the face of the Earth.
Tipſtaff, you muſt take care of the Jury.
Gentlemen, if any of you have a mind to drink at the Bar, before you go, you ſhall have ſome got for you.
No, my Lord, we do not care for drinking.
Then we will ſtay for you.
Then the Jury withdrew to conſider of their Verdict, and after about a quarter of an hours ſtay, they return'd and delivered in their Verdict: That the Defendant was guilty of the Perjury whereof he was Indicted. Which being Recorded, the Lord Chief Juſtice ſpoke to the Jury, to this effect.
Gentlemen, that we are not, God be thanked, in thoſe times of Diſorder and Confuſion that we have been heretofore in, to have Humming or Hiſſings to declare the Auditors Approbation or Diſlike of Juries Verdicts. But becauſe there has been this day mention made of the Opinions of Judges about Verdicts, I ſhall take the liberty to declare my mind to you now, That formy part, I am ſatisfied in my Conſcience, you have given a good and a juſt Verdict; and ſo I believe is every other Judge upon the Bench.
To which the reſt of the Judges aſſented; and then the Court aroſe.
(EEBO-TCP ; phase 2, no. A63215)
Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 102575)
Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 1076:2)
Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.
EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.
EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).
The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.
Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.
Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.
Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.
The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.
Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).
Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.
This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.