weeks in her convent, recommended him to Sir John Warner, as a proper inftrument, who afterwards fent him to father Harcourt to be inftructed.' And, as a further confirmation, he brought his brother James Bedloe, who fwore he knew nothing of the plot; but did teftify, That he had beard the prifoners often named, as being of his brother's acquaintance; and that he had, on his brother's behalf, received feveral fums of money from priests and Jefuits, as fifty or fixty pounds at a time.

2. That, about the latter end of Auguff, this year, at Mr. Harcourt's chamber, he met the prisoners, Ireland, Pickering, and Grove, with fome others; where he heard them difcourfe, that, fince the four Irish ruffians had miffed killing the King at Windfor, Pickering and Grove fhould go on with the defign, and that one Conyers, a Benedictine monk, was to be joined with them; and that they fhould endeavour to affaffinate his Majesty in his morning walks at Newmarket; that they were very eager upon it; and Mr. Grove, more forward than the reft, faid: Since it' could not be done clandeftinely, it should be attempted openly; and that thofe, who fhould fall in the attempt, had the glory to die in a good caufe; but, if they were difcovered, the difcovery could never come to that height, but their party would be strong enough to bring it to pass."

'3. He fwore, that Harcourt told him Grove was to have fifteen hundred pounds; and Pickering as many maffes, at twelvepence a mass, as came to the like fum.

'4. That at the fame time, when the difcourfe about killing the King was at Harcourt's chamber, there was likewife a design concerted amongst them of killing feveral noble perfons, and the particular parts affigned to every one; as Knight to kill the Earl of Shaftesbury; Prichard, the Duke of Buckingham, Oneil, the Earl of Offory; Obrien, the Duke of Ormond, &c.' The defence made by the prifoners confifted in,

ift, A peremptory denial of the whole. Grove particularly faid, As I have a foul to fave, I know nothing of this matter charged upon me.' Pickering affirmed, that he never fhot off a piftol in his life. And Whitebread, who was there during the trial, declared, before Almighty God, that Oates had not fpoken three words of truth.

he had ever spoken to him. Pickering affirmed, that he never faw Oates before; and offered to fwear, that he never was in Bedloe's company: And Grove affirmed, that he had fcarce any acquaintance with Oates; whereupon Oates gave him a remarkable token, viz. that in December laft, when he was with him, he owned, that he and three Irishmen had fired Southwark; and that they had a thousand pounds given them for it, whereof he had four hundred pounds, and the others two hundred pounds apiece."

3dly, Ireland, against Bedloe's evidence, affirmed he was not in London the whole month of Auguft, and part of September; and offered to prove it by twenty witnelles, that he was in Staffordshire and Chefhire all that time; and urged Bedloe to name the place and the company where ever they met together. But not only Bedloe fwore the contrary, but likewife Oates himself; but, what feemed more important, one Sarah Pain, formerly a fervant to Grove, fwore, that fhe faw Mr. Ireland at a fcrivener's door in Fetter-lane, about the 12th or 13th of Auguft.

4thly, Ireland, as well as Whitebread, objected against the grand confult of April the 24th, that hundreds could prove, that Oates was at St. Omer's, all the months of April and May; and offered to produce a certificate from thence, under the feal of the College. But fuch certificate was not allowed as evidence by the law of England. Lastly, they endeavoured to blaft the reputation of Doctor Oates, and prove him perjured, fince he had faid before the Council, that he knew no more than what he had already depofed, and yet had fince added other teftimonies. As I have fpoken of this objection, I shall not repeat

here what has been faid.

In conclufion, all three were found guil ty, and sentenced to be drawn, hanged, and quartered; but the execution of Ireland and Grove was deferred till the 24th of January, and that of Pickering to the 9th of May. They perfifted all three, to their laft breath, to proteft they were as innocent of the crimes, for which they were condemned, as the child unborn.

Having thus reprefented what is urged on both fides, we leave the reader to his own judgment. The affair of the confpiracy muit now be interrupted for fome time, in order to proceed to another, which made a great noife at this time. But it is neceffary to look back a little into the fituation of the English Court,

The Earl of Danby, Lord Treasurer, was confidered as the King's Prime Mi

nifter.

it

nifter. He had a great genius, and a folid judgment; and, as he difapproved of the principles of the Cabal, endeavoured to difengage the King from the methods he had been led into by their counfels. This drew upon him the enmity of the Duke of York, and all the French faction, with whom joined the Lord Ruffel, and other malecontents in the House of Commons; and, among the Peers, the Earls of Effex and Shaftesbury; whilft the Duke of Monmouth and the Duchefs of Portsmouth did their utmost to leffen his credit with the King. In a word, a strong party was formed against him, who were bent to ruin him, at any rate. Thefe enemies were alfo joined by another, who had been his moft intimate friend. This was Mr. Montague, Ambassador in France, who, afpiring to the office of Secretary of State, took very ill, that the Treafurer had engaged to bring in Sir William Temple. Mr. Montague was the Treafurer's most dangerous enemy, because he had private letters in his hands from that Minifter; and though he could not divulge them, without great injury to the King, this gave him no uneafinefs, because, refolving to throw himfelf into the party against the Court, which was most prevalent in the Parliament, he knew he fhould be protected, even against the King himself. To this end, he got himself elected Member for Northampton, and fuddenly leaving Paris, without the King's confent or knowledge, came to London, and took his feat in the House. The King, offended at fo ftrange a proceeding, and being alfo informed, by the Swedish Ambaffador, of the defign of the Treasurer's enemies, and their intention to make ufe of his letters, fent, the 19th of December, the following meffage to the Houfe of Commons: That, upon information that Mr. Montague, a Member of that Houfe, and late Ambassador in France, had held feveral conferences with the Pope's Nuncio there, without any directions or inftructions from his Majefty; his Majefty, to the end that he might know the truth of that matter, had given orders for the feizing of Mr. Montague's papers. The Leaders of the oppofite party to the King made great objections to this meffage, pretending it ought to be first known, whether the information had been given upon oath, and what was the nature of Mr. Montague's crime, before they could confent to the feizure of his papers. Upon this, Mr. Montague acquainted the House, • That he had in his cuftody some papers, which, as he conceived, might tend very much to the fafety of the King's perfon,

1

and the prefervation of the government." A Committee was immediately appointed to bring the writings to the Houfe; which being accordingly done, and Mr. Montague ordered to felect fuch of them as he thought for the fervice of the Houfe, and difpofe of the reft as he pleased, he produced two letters, out of many others, both fubfcribed Danby, and fent to him at Paris, on the negociation of the money which his Majefty expected from the King of France, at the bottom of one of which were thefe words: This letter is writ by my order, C. R. These letters difcovering to the Houfe from whence had proceeded the King's delays, with regard to the war a gainit France, they immediately refolved

That there was fufficient matter of impeachment against Thomas, Earl of Danby, Lord Treafurer of England; and within two days, by the help of Mr. Montague, the articles of impeachment were drawn up, and fent to the House of Lords. But this impeachment was rather against the King himself, than the Earl of Danby, who had only acted by his exprefs orders; for, tho in the impeachment were inferted feveral articles which only concerned the Earl, it was not in thofe that the ftrength of the impeachment confifted, but in those relating to the negociation with France concerning the King's penfion, on pretence that the Lord Treasurer had acted without order, though the contrary was not doubted. But the intention was to oblige the Earl, for his own fafety, to plead the King's orders for what he had done. This perplexed him extremely, for he could not juftify himself, without accufing the King; and he could not accufe the King, without intirely forfeiting his favour; efpecially as the King had earneftly defired him not to divulge his fecrets, offering him letters of pardon to fcreen him from the Parliament. He therefore refolved to conceal the King's private orders upon this affair; but, however, could not help fending two of Montague's letters to the Commons, which difcovered him to be the principal author of this negociation. These letters alfo fhewed, that the Court of France confidered the Lord Treasurer as their great enemy, whofe ruin was to be effected, in order to have the King of England at their difpofal. But the Commons were fo inraged against the Earl, that they would not fuffer thefe letters to be read. On the other hand, when the articles of his impeachment were read in the Houfe of Lords, he, in a fpeech, frequently infinuated, that he could make fuch a defence as would admit of no reply. Every one knew what he meant, but it is certain he was not fo much aimed

at, as the King himself; and that it was intended by this means, more than by the plot itfelf, to fhew the public, that the King and the Duke of York were the real authors of all the evils of the kingdom, and, in a word, the Heads of the confpiracy to fubvert the government and Protestant religion. The King easily perceived the design of the Earl of Danby's impeachment, and therefore, before the Lords could refolve whether the Earl of Danby fhould be fent to the Tower, came to the Parliament the 30th of December, and prorogued it to the 4th of February, after paffing a fingle act against the Papifts.

Immediately after the prorogation of the Parliament, Sir Jofeph Williamfon, Secretary of State, refigned the feals into the hands of the King, who appointed Robert Spencer, Earl of Sunderland, in his room, though he had given hopes of the place to Sir William Temple, then Ambaffador in Holland, and had called him over for that purpose. But Temple, at his arrival, found the poft filled, the Earl of Sunderland having paid Williamfon fix thousand pounds, and five hundred guineas, which Temple was not able or willing to give. Shortly after, the King difmiffed the Earl of Danby, and put the Treafury into commiffion.

After the prorogation, the King was extremely embarraffed, not only by reafon of the Earl of Danby's impeachment, which properly fell upon him, but also by frefl difcoveries both of the plot and Godfrey's murder. The 21st of December, Miles Prance, a goldfmith of London, a Papift, who had fometimes worked for the Queen, in her chapel of Somerset-house, was taken up by a warrant from the Council, upon the information of one Wren, a lodger in his houfe, that he was concerned in the murder of Godfrey. Though it was very poffible for Godfrey to have been murdered by perfons not in the plot, yet it was generally believed the murder was committed by Papifts, and that, if the authors could be dif. covered, it would be a great means to unravel the plot. Wherefore the two Houfes had appointed a Committee, of which the Earl of Shaftesbury was Chairman, to inquire after the authors of this murder.

In this affair, as in that of the plot, there are, among the Hiftorians, two parties directly oppofite; one afferting this murder was committed by Papifts, and the other maintaining the contrary. The latter, in fupport of their opinion, relate numberlefs facts, with fo many circumftances, that they would be more than capable of proving what they advance, could their faithful pels, and alfo the certainty of the facts, be

intirely relied on. But it is very surprising to fee continually the truth of their opinion fuppofed, without any other proof than a great many unwarranted facts. But, as for Prance, the goldfmith, it is readily fuppofed he was malicioufly accused by Wren, becaufe Prance had forced him to pay fourteen months rent, due to him for lodging; and that, having at firft with execrations denied the murder, he was at laft compelled, by threats and ill treatment, to confefs, that he knew the whole matter, and to give a particular account of all the circumstances. If this fuppofition was well proved, or at leaft fupported by the teftimony of any cotemporary perfon of reputation known in London, there would be no occafion to seek for other proofs. But, as I have faid, these facts are declared as undeniable, without any warrant. For my part, who seek not to impofe upon my readers, I fhall only inform them of the facts univerfally acknowledged, adding alfo fuch as are doubtful and advanced without proof, that the reader may know what he is to adhere to.

Prance being arrested, as I faid, was carried to Westminster, to be examined be fore a Committee of the Lords.

Here a decifive fact is begun to be advanced, without any author, namely, that Prance was first carried into a little room, where several persons went to see him; and, among others, Bedloe, who, knowing him not, privately inquired which was the prifoner? When he was informed, he withdrew to an eating houfe in the neighbourhood, where Prance was brought fome time after, till he fhould be called to his examination. As foon as Bedloe, who was purpofely planted in the fame room, had caft his eyes upon him, he cried out, < This is one of the rogues that I faw with a dark lanthorn about the body of Sir Edmundbury Godfrey; but he was then in a perriwig.'

"

If any care had been taken to prove that Bedloe had afked which was Prance, and that he purpofely waited for him in the eating houfe, where he knew he was to be brought, there would be no need of other proof, and the cafe would be decided. But this fact intirely rests upon the authority of the Historian who relates it.

Prance being carried to the Committee of Lords, Bedloe directly charged him with the murder of Godfrey, and Wren with being out of the house, while the body was miffing. Prance denied all, with imprecations upon himself. But, as the bare denial of a prifoner ought not to carry it against the teftimony of two witneffes, the. Lords thought fit to fend him to Newgate, S &

where

where he was put in the condemned hole, loaden with heavy irons.

But here is another fact ftill more im portant, advanced with the fame affurance without any authority.

The next morning early, a man entered the condemned hole, where Prance was, and, laying down a paper upon a form juft by him, retired; foon after, came in another with a candle, who fet it down and left him. By that light he read the paper, wherein he found brief hints to what he was to fwear, when he thould be called to his fecond examination, with a menace of being hanged, if he did not confefs what was expected of him. Prance, fays the Author, prefently imagined this to be a contrivance of the Lord Shaftesbury.

I proceed to other facts, which are not contelted. Prance, after he had continued in prifon all night, and part of the next day, told Captain Richardfon, Master of Newgate, that he had matters of great moment to communicate to the Earl of Shaftefbury, Chairman of the Committee. He was, according to his request, carried the fame night to the Earl, who, in prefence of three other perfons, examined him five or fix hours. It is pretended that the Earl abufed and menaced him, telling him, That there were great ones concerned, and he must discover them too, for the little ones fhould not ferve his turn; bidding him not spare the King himfelf. It does not, however, appear, that thefe menaces made much impreffion upon Prance, fince his depofitions reached only perfons of low condition. However, he difcovered part of what he faid he knew, with a promife of a more ample confeffion, if he might have his pardon. He figned his depofition, and was returned to prifon. Upon this, the Lords obtained for him, from his Majefty, a full and general pardon. Then a Committee of the Lords was fent to Newgate to acquaint him with it, and to examine him. The Commons, likewife, ordered him to be examined by a Committee of fecrecy. Thefe two examinations being made with great tritnefs, Prance was carried the next day to Whitehall, to be examined before the King and Council.

In this examination he accufed five perfons as actually prefent at the murder, namely, Girald and Kelly, two Irish priefts; Robert Green, cushion-man to the Queen's chapel; Laurence Hill, fervant to Dr. Godden, Treasurer of the chapel; and Henry Berry, porter of Somerfet-house. Being afked, Why he gave fo different a relation to the Committee of Lord's from what he now fo freely confeffed? He an

fwered, That he was not then sure of his par don. Being further asked, Why he cam not in upon the proclamation and rewar thereof? He faid, He was afraid to trust i As he had been very particular concernin the circumftances of the time, place, an manner of the murder, the King, to be assu red of the truth, appointed the Duke Monmouth, the Earl of Offory, and th Vice chamberlain, to go with Prance t Somerfet-houfe, and make him fhew ther the places where the things were acted.

After Prance had remained four or fiv days in Newgate, he was once more carrie to be examined before the King in Coun çil. But he made it his request that h might firft wait upon the King himfelt Upon this, Richardfon had orders to carry him to Mr. Chiffinch's lodgings, where the King came. The King, taking Prance into a room by himself, after fome time, opened the door, and bad Chiffinch and Richardfon take notice of what Prance faid who, being called to speak out plainly, declared, That the men he had worn against were all innocent, and that all he had fworn against them was falfe; which he affirmed with great paffion and affeveration. Upon which the King asked him, Upon your falvation is it fo? He replied, Upon my falvation the whole accufation is falfe. He was then carried before the Council, where he declared to the fame effect, and was afked, What inducement he had to his former ftoryWho put him upon it? He said, No body prompted him; he only knew the men he fwore against; he never faw Bedloe before he was taken up; he knew nothing of the plot nor of the murder and could not reft for the story he had told. But Wren owed him money, and threatened him because he dunned him for it, and fo haired him into it. He was then remanded to prifon.

After fo ferious an affeveration, no man of fenfe can imagine, that Catholics or Courtiers had gained Prance to retract his first depofition: For this would be only to alledge a bare fufpicion without proof. But to have it believed, that the Committee, and feveral Members of both Houses, had threatened Prance, in cafe his depofition agreed not with Bedloe's, there is no need of proof; and the bare relation of a historian, who wrote above thirty years after, is more than fufficient for that.

Unhappily Prance retracted once more. But this fignifies nothing, because he denied what he had lately faid before the King and Council, by reafon of the exceffive torments he was made to fuffer, till he had promised to depofe whatever was defired. [To be continued.]

REMARKS