L. C. J. But you prove nothing.

L. C. J. Call him. [But he appeared not.] L. C. J. Gentlemen of the Jury; Here hath been a very long evidence, and a very confused one; and you cannot expect, that it should be wholly repeated to you: For it is almost inpossible for any one to remember it; neither would I if I could, because a great deal of it is impertinent, and vainly to be repeated: And besides, many things have been said over and over again, to no purpose. But I will observe to you, as well as I can, what Testimonies there are against each particular man of them; and that I do look upon to be very material. And I leave it to you, to judge and consider, how far the evidence is credible, and how far it is substantial.

Against Mr. Whitebread, you have the Testimony of three, Oates, Dugdale, and Bedlow: Against Mr. Fenwick, you have the Testimony of Oates, Bedlow and Praunce: Against Harcourt, you have Oates, Dugdale, Bedlow, and Praunce. You have against Gavan, Dugdale and Oates; and against Turner, Dugdale and Oates: So that, to the two last, you have two, three to the two first, and four to Harcourt.

Now, the matter that they have sworn, bath been all tending to one thing; the murder of the King, the advancing of Popery, and suppression of the Protestant religion: That is the thing that all the evidence does drive at.

For Dugdale, for aught we can perceive, he bath been upon the matter a stranger to Oates and Bedlow; and I do not find, that he had any correspondence with, or knowledge of them, at the time he charges Mr. Harcourt and Mr. Gavan. And he charges them with the very self same things, viz. the consulting the death of the king, and advancement of popery. And they have several instances of the facts, as their several consultations; how they met together, and where, or at what place. And Dugdale tells you of a letter that he found; wherein Whitebread gave charge for the entertainment of good stout fellows; No matter for gentlemen, so they were resolute. And so they have several mediums to prove one and the same thing.

Mr. Fenwick says to all this, Here is nothing against us, but talking and swearing: But for that, he hath been told (if it were possible for him to learn) that all Testimony is but talking and swearing. For all things, all mens lives and fortunes, are determined by an oath; and an oath is by talking, by kissing the book, and calling God to witness to the truth of what is

their religion, with weak arguments, and falla

cious reasons.

For that long business, that Mr. Gavan hath undertaken to say against Mr. Oates, and what they all insist upon, viz. the number of their witnesses, which were sixteen, amounts to this, to disprove Mr. Oates that it could not be trae what he says, That he should be present here at a consult, the 24th of April, because they have brought 16 from St. Omers to prove, That he was there all April and May.

It is very true now, if that be so, it is impossible Oates can swear any truth: hat whe ther that is to be believed, or no, is the question. Methinks they did not do well for themselves, when they bid you remember the nature of the evidence. They did well enough to bid you remember the number: For the number is more than what Oates is backed with on the other side; but the nature is of much less weight: Not only because they are not upon their oaths, for by law they may not be upon their oaths (and that must not be charged on them as a defect, seeing they would swear, I doubt not, if they might;) but because their Testimony is really to be believed much alike without an oath, as with one; because they are of a religion that can dispense. with oaths, though false, for the sake of a good cause.

But, seeing they desire the nature of the men may be considered, you are to observe, that they are proselytes, and young striplings of their church; which does indeed, in one respect or other, abuse all her disciples, and keeps them in a blind obedience, to pursue and effect all her commands,

If the doctrines of that church were better; if such which are allowed by their chief authors, were but less bloody and inhuman; if they had ever put those that are so, into an Index Expurgatorius, that they might have been publicly disowned, and declared as the particular opinions of some ill men, which they did disa, vow; these men might have been then more worthy to be regarded. But when none of their popes have done this (who must have very strange forebeads, if they say they have) and such doctrines are still owned, there is much indeed to be observed from the nature of the evidence, the nature of the men, and their profession.

I must confess, I believe that they would deny their principles to be bloody or to be defended and allowed by any of their best aur thors, if at this time the fear of apparent falshood did not deter them; but if to murder kings, or to depose them and absolve their sub

And now, if the king's evidence, after this, stood alone, it were yet something; but when you have Mr. Oates' testimony, as to this great inatter of his appearing in April, confirmed by seven or eight witnesses, that speak so expressly to it, how will they answer it! do they make sir Richard Barker a person of no value? do they so little esteem the minister, that says I knew him though he was in disguise; and went and said it presently to a woman that he knew was acquainted with Oates? and asking her, when she saw Mr. Oates? and she saying, not a great while; he said, I saw him later than you; and says, he did know him: and this is confirmed still by sir Richard Barker, who tells you, that his men told him that he had been there. What should make them to acquaint their master so, if it were not so? or do you think it a thing maliciously prepared or invented to take away the lives of these men, that his men should tell him a story so long ago? if it be not true, to what purpose should they tell him so? and if it be true, it confirms the matter sworn against them.

There is he that was his companion, the Schoolmaster, that says, in the beginning of May was twelvemonth, Mr. Oates dined with him at his house, sat with him four hours, discoursed of his travels into Spain and St. Omers, and there is the man that is a papist, if not a priest, that swears he saw him twice, about the middle of April, at Mr. Charles Howard's lodgings in Arundel House; so that here are seven witnesses, direct or circumstantial, to prove Mr. Oates to have been in London, in April and May, 1678.

But say they, This is but talking and swearing. Very fine! And the St. Omers youths is talking but not swearing, Ay! But then their numbers are not so many. That, gentlemen, I leave to you, for both cannot be true. The Testimony of Mr. Oates and the witnesses that he had to back himself withal, and to prove himself to be here, is inconsistent with what the young men say, that he was at St. Omers.

Now, if you observe, all these mens defence is in the circumstantial part of the evidence, in

watching and catching at what day, what hour, and what month? How Mr. Oates reckoned false, so and so: if he came here about the 20th of April, how could they see him the 1st of May; and they think then, they have got such a mighty victory; but it is not so weighty an argument with protestants, after all their conceit, that is unanswerable, for here is the point, The matter of time is a thing that no man can so precisely charge his memory with, as that it should be too strictly the measure of your judgments about truth or falshood, by the mistake of seven or eight days. Examine yourselves, how often every day you do mistake things that have been transacted half a year ago, and err in point of time, taking one week for another, and one month for another; and though I must say, it is considerable, yet too great weight is not to be laid upon that.

As for that they insist upon so much, the coming over of sir Thomas Preston and sir John Warner, with Mr. Qates; it is true, three of four witnesses speak as to Sir John Warner, and some to sir Thomas Preston; and they say, they were both beyond sea when Mr. Oates came over, but if the sixteen be not to be believed in the first matter and if Mr. Oates does say true, notwithstanding all their evidence, that he was here such a time in April and May, then I will tell you what inference may naturally be; to wit, That they cannot want a witness to prove, what they please for I believe there is none of them all will make any bones of it.

I say gentlemen, if you are satisfied in your consciences, that the evidence on Mr. Oates his part, to that point (that is to say, seven witnesses ought to prevail with you, to believe ho was here in those months (notwithstanding the sixteen witnesses, who say they saw him every day beyond sea, in April and May), their other evidence about his coming over with Preston and Warner will have no great weight: because the other is the great matter, by which they make the substance of their defence.

I am glad indeed to see a gentleman here, whose face I never saw before, and that is Mr. Dugdale. Upon my word he hath escaped well, for I find little said against him, very. little either as to the matter or the manner of his Evidence. They would have made reflection on him for his poverty, but I hope that: they, whose religion is to vow poverty, will never insist on that for any great objection against any.

L. C. J. North. Your lordship hath forgot that he said be gave away 3 or 400 pounds to them.

L. C. J. But I will challenge all the papists in England, to satisfy any man that hears me this day of one piece of evidence, which will turn every protestant's heart against the papists. If so be they murdered sir Edmundbury Godfrey, the plot even by that, is in a great mea-' sure proved upon them by that base murder. And what can be a plainer proof of it, than the evidence of this day, which Mr. Dugdale.pro

duces? We had notice, saith he, on Monday night, that on the Saturday before it, sir E. Godfrey was killed; (which falls out to be that very Saturday he was first missing;) which notice was given in a letter writ by Harcourt to Ewers, another priest, that same Saturday night, wherein were these words, This night sir E. Godfrey is dispatched ;' and I am sure, if this be true, then no man can say, but they murdered him.

US.

Whitebread. It is not alledged against any of

L. C. J. It is in evidence of the plot in general, and to Harcourt in particular.

Harcourt. He never shews the letter that he says I writ.

L. C. J. He says that he used to peruse the letters, and that Ewers had this again, after he had perused it; he says also he has received at times, a hundred letters from you, and this among the rest. Now the question is, Whether it be true, or no? To make it out, he produces Mr. Chetwyn, whom I hope you will not deny to be a gentleman of one of the best families of his country, and of honest reputation; who says, That on the Tuesday following that Saturday sir E. Godfrey was missed, he and another were talking together in Staffordshire, and that the other person asked him, If he knew of the death of any justice of the peace at Westminster; and when he told him, he had heard of no such thing; No; said he, that is strange, you living sometimes about Westminster; for, said he, The wench at the alsehouse says, That this morning Mr. Dugdale said to two other gentlemen, there was a justice of peace at Westminster killed; and Mr. Dugdale swears, that was sir E. Godfrey. Now, if Dugdale he fit to be believed, that he saw such a letter, as be must be if he be not a very great prophet, to be able to foretel this; or if the maid that said this did not invent it (a thing then impossible to be done), or Mr. Chetwyn feigned that he heard the man make his report from the maid; this thing could not come to pass, but by these men. Nay, if Mr. Dugdale could not do as great a miracle as any are in the Popish Legends, how could he tell, that it was done on the same night when it was done at London? or speak of it on the Monday night after, when it was not known in London till the Thursday following? This will stick, I assure you, sirs, upon all your party.

For my own part, this evidence of Mr. Dugdale's gives me the greatest satisfaction of any thing in the world in this matter; and whilst we rest satisfied in the murder of that man, and are morally certain you must do it, know. ing of what principles you are, you cannot blame us, if, upon such manifest reasons, we lay it upon you.

And this is occasional evidence, which I, for my part, never heard before this day; nor can I be more, or better satisfied, than I am upon this point, viz. the testimony that I have received this afternoon, concerning the murder of sir E. Godfrey. As to the defences they

have made, they are exceptions in point of time, but do not affect Mr. Dugdale; for they have hardly the confidence to deny the things he says to be true against them.

They fall foul, indeed, upon Mr. Oates: He appears to have been their agent; and whilst so, bad enough: but if he had not had a mind to have become a good man, he would not likely have done us that good that he hath done, in discovering the design you had engaged him in. Let any man judge, by your principles and practices, what you will not do for the promoting of the same.

For while this gentleman's blood lies upon you (and some have been executed for it), it must be yet farther told you, that in what you did do, you have given us a specimen of what you would do. We have a testimony, that for promoting your cause, you would not stick at the Protestants blood. You began with sir E. Godfrey, but who knows where you would have made an end! It was this one man you killed in his person, but in effigy the whole nation. It was in one man's blood your hands are embrued; but your souls were dipt in the blood of us all. This was a handsel only of what was to follow; and so long as we are convinced you killed him, we cannot but be lieve you would also kill the king. We cannot but believe you would make all of us away that stand in the way of your religion: a religion which, according to what it is, you would bring in upon us; by a conversion of us with blood; and by a baptisin with fire. God keep our land from the one, and our city from the other!

To return: The Letter that is found in Harcourt's papers, does further confirm Mr. Oates in all the great and considerable matters that he says; that there was a Plot; that that plot was called by the name of a Design, which was to be kept close and secret : and this is an evidence that cannot lie. For that letter will never be got off, no more than the other letter, that Mr. Dugdale speaks of about sir E. Godfrey.

And thus I leave it to you, gentlemen: You have heard how many witnesses they have had for them, about 24 or 25, of one sort or another. You have heard what they apply their testimony unto, to convict Mr. Ŏates of falsehood in matter of time; which was their principal defence: that he was not here in April and May, and that he came not over with sir Thomas Preston, and sir John Warner, and that Ireland was not here all August. You have heard what witnesses Oates is backed withal, as to the time of his being here: and the maid says, she saw Ireland here in August.

However, though their defence depends but upon a point of time, I must tell you, it ought to be well considered, for it is indeed very considerable towards their defence; and God forbid but we should be equal to all men.

And so I have remembered, as well as I can, in this long and perplexed Evidence, that which seems to me most material, as to their charge

or discharge; and that which they have made their greatest defence by the youths from St. Omers, to disprove Mr. Oates his being here, and Mr. Ireland's not being in London in August, which in truth is not the proper business of this day, but bath received a former verdict before; for if so be the jury before had not been satisfied of the truth of that, they could never have found Ireland guilty. So I leave it to you upon the whole matter. I can remember nothing besides. Go together, and consider of your verdict, according to your evidence.

L. C. J. North. Gentlemen, my lord hath repeated it so fully to you, that I shall not need to add any thing to it.

Then an officer was sworn to keep the Jury, who withdrew; and the judges also went off from the bench, leaving Mr. Recorder, and a competent number of commissioners there, to take the verdict; and about the space of a quarter of an hour, the jury returned, and answered to their names, and gave in their verdict thus:

Foreman. Guilty.

Cl. of the Cr. What goods or chattels? Foreman. None, to our knowledge: [And so severally of the rest.]'

Which verdict being recorded, in usual form, Mr. Recorder spoke to the Jury thus ;

Gentlemen, you of the Jury, There hath been a long evidence given against the prisoners at the bar: they were all indicted, arraigned, fairly tried, and fully heard for hightreason, depending upon several circumstances. They can none of them pretend to say (and I take the liberty to take notice of it, for the satisfaction of them, and all that are here present, the prisoners at the bar were either wanting to and all the world), that not a person among themselves to offer, or the court to them to

hear

selves. But upon a long evidence, a full disany thing that they could say for themcussing the objections made against it, and a patient hearing of the defence they made, they are found guilty: and I do think, that every honest man will say, that they are unexcep

Omnes. Yes.

Cl. of the Cr. Who shall say for you?
Omnes. Foreman.

Cl. of the Cr. Thomas White alias Whitebread, hold up thy hand. You of the jury, look upon the prisoner: How say you? Is he Guilty of the high-treason whereof he stands indicted, or Not Guilty?

you have given.

And then the Prisoners were carried back to Newgate, and the court adjourned till eight next morning: when the court proceeded to the Trial of Richard Langhorn.

* See the Account of their Sentence and Execution at the end of the next Case.

UPON Saturday the 14th of June, 1679, at the Sessions-house in the Old-Bailey, London, the Court, according to their adjournment the preceding day, met, and proceeded to the trial of Richard Langhorn, esq. in this manner:

Cl. of the Cr. Set Richard Langhorn to the bar. Richard Langhorn, hold up thy hand: (Which he did.) Thou standest indicted in London by the name of Richard Langhorn, late of London, esq.

"For that you Richard Langhorn the elder, as a false traitor of the most illustrious, serene, and excellent prince, Charles the second, by the grace of God, king of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith, your supreme and natural lord, not having the fear of God in your heart, nor weighing the duty of your allegiance, but being moved and seduced by the instigation of the devil, the cordial love, and true, due, and natural obedience, which true and faithful subjects of our said sovereign lord the king, towards him do and ought to bear, altogether withdrawing, and devising, and with all your strength, intending

See the Trial of John Tasborough and Anne Price in February 1680 infra.

VOL. VII.

the peace and common tranquillity of this kingdom to disturb, and the true worship of God within this kingdom used, and by law established, to overthrow, and sedition and rebellion within this kingdom to stir up and procure, and the true love, duty and obedience, which true and faithful subjects of our said lord the king, towards him, do, and of right ought to bear, to withdraw, relinquish, and extinguish; on the 30th day of September, in the 30th year of his majesty's reign, at London, in the parish of St. Dunstan's in the West, in the ward of Farringdon without, London, aforesaid, falsly, maliciously, subtilly, and traitorously, with many other false traitors of our sovereign lord the king unknown, did purpose, compass, imagine, intend, consult and agree, to stir up sedition and rebellion within this kingdom of England, against our said sovereign lord the king, and a miserable slaughter amongst the subjects of our said lord the king, of his kingdoms of England, to procure and cause, and our said sovereign lord the king, from his kingly state, title, power, and government of his kingdom of England, totally to deprive, de pose, and disinherit, and our said sovereign lord the king to death and final destruction to 2 E