other matters therein contained.-The sum of what he then swore was, that he had been privy to many consultations and discourses of the jesuits, about killing the king. That at one time they designed to shoot him, which was to be done by two men, whose names were Grove and Pickering. That afterwards it was thought better to 'do it by poison; and this was to be done by Sir George Wakeman, a papist and physician to the queen. He said also that many jesuits had disguised themselves, and gone into Scotland among the field conventiclers, to distract the government there. That he himself ! was sent first to St. Omer's, then to Paris, and afterwards into Spain, to negociate this design. That upon his return with many letters and ⚫ directions from beyond sea to the jesuits here in England, there was a great consult held by them in different rooms in a tavern behind • St. Clement's church, in which he was employed to carry the resolution from room to room, and so to hand them round. That at that < time a fixed resolution was taken to kill the king in one or other of the ways above-mentioned, &c. These things were sworn by him the first day he appeared before the council. Upon this he was sent that very night with a guard, to seize upon the jesuits and their · papers. And for two or three days after he was almost perpetually employed, night and day, either in apprehending persons he had sworn against, or in attending the council. This fatigue he made use of afterwards for an excuse to palliate several gross inconsistencies that appeared in the evidence delivered by him at different times. Upon his oath there were apprehended Sir George Wakeman abovementioned, Mr. Edward Coleman, secretary to the duchess of York, Mr. Richard Langhorn, an eminent counsellor at law, all papists and laymen; Thomas Whitebread, John Gavan, Anthony Turner, Wil liam Ireland, William Marshall, William Rumley, James Corker, and Thomas Pickering, jesuits and monks, who were accused by 'him of being actors in, or privy to the plot.

That this plot, continues the protestant historian, as sworn to by Oates, was a wicked forgery and imposture, is, I believe, little doubted at present by thinking unprejudiced men. The character • of the informer is no small diminution of its credit: for though he had worn the habit of a clergyman, he was a fellow of a most infa'mous life. He had been once presented for perjury. He had been made a chaplain in one of the king's ships, but was dismissed upon a complaint of some unnatural practices not fit to be named. He afterwards procured a qualification to be chaplain to the duke of Norfolk, and that duke being a Roman catholic, Oates expressed soon after an inclination to the popish religion, not from any motive of conscience, but thinking probably to reap some small advantage by that vile condescension. But he found himself disappointed; for he quickly perceived he had lost all hopes from the church of England, to starve in that of Rome. At last he was sent to the English seminary of jesuits at St. Omer's, where he was treated with great contempt. From St. Omer's he had been sent through France into Spain, and from thence returned to England, where he soon after broached the plot. Whether in this he were animated by a spirit of revenge, for the ill usage he had received from the jesuits, or by

hopes of reward for the discovery, or whether he was an instrument ⚫ of others to swear what was prepared for him, has been variously thought, but must remain a doubt till the great day, when all secrets shall be revealed.

That there has been, continues the historian, p. 688, and ever "will be a popish plot for the restoring that religion amongst us, will 'be easily believed by such as know the restless temper of the church ⚫ and court of Rome. But that they should design to compass this by killing the king, or by the violent methods sworn to by Oates and his associates, appears incredible from the palpable falsehoods and 'inconsistencies in their evidence.'

As to the other chief witnesses of the plot, viz. William Bedloe, the historian, p. 690. gives his character in the following lines. Soon after this, Oates's discovery was confirmed by a new evidence perfectly suited to the old one. His name was William Bedloe, a person who had gone through many various circumstances of life, and had been very infamous in every one of them. He was thoroughly possessed of all those qualifications that go to the compleating of an eminent rogue. He was of a base birth and mean parentage, so that little care being taken of his education, or of any provision for him, he was forced to make his way in the world by himself. He I might have done this in an honest way, being not without capacity. But a natural certain bent towards wickedness, which is found in some dispositions, made him choose a contrary course. He was first a poor foot boy, or runner on errands; and afterwards got into a livery in the family of the lord Bellasis. After this he turned a kind of post or letter carrier beyond sea, in which condition he got • acquainted with the names and concerns of people of fashion. He made use of this to put in practice a hundred rogueries, being of a bold and daring temper, with a good turn of wit and address. Thus he run through all the arts and methods of sharping, going under false names, and borrowing money, or other valuable things by forged recommendations, or by personating men of figure. He ⚫ travelled over France and Spain under the character of a person of quality, robbing and cheating wherever he went. In the course of this sort of life he had been put into several prisons, &c. He was just got out of prison, where he was fed out of the alms-basket, when the reward and encouragement were offered to the discoverers ' of Godfrey's murder. Upon this he went from London to Bristol, and in the way thither sent a letter to secretary Coventry, with a desire that he might be seized at Bristol. This was done accordingly with great noise, that he might be looked on as a great disco6 verer. November the 5th he was sent to London, where he was ⚫ dubbed a captain, and the king's evidence; and, like Oates before him, had guards and subsistence at the king's charge at Whitehall. • When he was examined before the secretary of state in the king's presence, he said he had seen Godfrey's body at Somerset-house, and that a servant of lord Bellasis offered him 4000l. to assist in carrying it away. That upon this he went out of town to Bristol, but that his conscience so haunted him, that it forced him to discover it.

Being asked if he knew any thing of the plot, he denied it upon oath. He said indeed that he had heard of 40,000 men to be sent from Spain, who were to meet as pilgrims at St. Jago's, and to be shipped from thence to England, which was all he knew. This was a strange story: forty thousand pilgrims was an army in disguise, never heard of but in Bedloe's evidence, and the comedy of the Rehearsal. And he could not give any account of the fleet that was to transport such extraordinary invaders. But it plainly appeared he had been better instructed before the next day: for being then brought before the house of lords, he abounded in discoveries; and 'accused lord Bellasis, lord Powis, lord Arundel of Wardor, and Coleman, of a design to kill the king; and told the house he had begun to put a narrative of the plot in writing, and desired time to finish it. When he was asked whether he knew Titus Oates, he possitively denied it; but afterwards he brought himself off by saying, he knew him only by the name of Ambrose.

Four days after, his discoveries were much enlarged. He said forty thousand men were to be ready in London. That ten thousand men were to be sent from Flanders, besides the pilgrims of St. Jago's in Spain. That Hull was to be surprized just at the critical time the plot was discovered. That he was told that all the Roman catholics of any figure in England were acquainted with this plot, with many other particulars too long and trivial to be enumerated. There cannot be a more surprizing example of the force of universal prejudice, than that such an evidence should gain attention, much more belief, among so many wise men that heard it. How could it be thought that forty thousand effective men should be ready in Lon'don for such a design, when probably there is not that number of papists to be found throughout the city, though we take in women and children? &c.

The parliament believed all these strange stories; and the king was forced to drive with the tide, and appear as zealous as they. Through the course of this month nothing was heard of but addresses and proclamations against papists. And on the 30th of November the king came and passed the bill for disabling papists from sitting in either house of parliament.' So far the historian, p. 691.

Who adds in the same place, the following account of Mr. Staley, condemned and executed about this time, though not properly for the plot.

The next remarkable occurrence, says he, was the trial of Mr. William Staley, a popish banker, for treasonable words. One Carstairs, a Scotchman, a man of a very ill character, happened to be in an eating-house in Covent-Garden, where Staley was at dinner in the next room to him. Carstairs pretended he heard him say in French, that the king was a rogue, and persecuted the people of God, and that he would stab him, if nobody else would. These words he wrote down, and went next morning to Staley, telling him 'he would swear these words against him, and demanded a sum of money of him. Staley was much perplexed; he saw the danger of * such an accusation at such a time; but he was under difficulties, and

*refused to part with the money. So he was apprehended, and five days after tried and cast. The evidence against him was positive; and being strangers he did not know their character. He could only urge how improbable it was, he should say such things in a public room, and that in a part of the town where French was so well under'stood. He was asked, while under condemnation, whether he knew any thing of the plot? but he denied it, as also the words sworn against 'him. He was executed at Tyburn, where he behaved himself very decently. His trial was succeeded by that of Mr. Edward Coleman, of whom we shall now treat.

191. * Edward Coleman, Gentleman.-1678. EDWARD Coleman was a minister's son, born in Suffolk, and educated in the university of Cambridge, who afterwards became a zealous con→ vert to the catholic faith. This gentleman, says the continuator of 'Baker, was secretary to the dutchess of York, a great bigot in his re ligion, and of a busy head. This engaged him in many projects for 'the restoring of popery here, or at least procuring a liberty of conscience for those of that profession. He had been engaged in a correspondence 'with P. Le Chaise, the French king's confessor, since the year 1674; in the course of which, he was continually entertaining him with ' schemes and projects for advancing the interest of the French king, ' and the church of Rome.' These letters being seized, were produced at his trial, which came on at the Old Bailey, November 28, 1678.

The evidence against him, were Oates and Bedloe, with his own papers. The two first charged him with having been privy to several consults for killing the king, and to another for raising rebellion in Ireland, and that he had received a commission " from the general of the jesuits," to be secretary of state. As to his letters, they shewed beyond contradiction, that he had been busy in projects for introducing popery; and some warm expressions which he had let fall, were made use of to represent him as a more dangerous person than he really was. But all this had no manner of relation to the plot, there not appearing throughout all his letters, the least intention of hurting the king, or of using violence of any sort, to compass his undertakings, but much that implied the contrary.

'He pleaded this himself, when he came to make his defence. As 'to Oates and Bedloe, he observed, (which was very true) that when 'he appeared before the council, Oates did not know him. Oates ex'cused himself, by alledging the weakness of his sight, the candlelight, and Coleman's change of wig and habit; but, he said, as soon as he heard him speak he knew him. He observed also, that when 'Oates first appeared before the council, he charged him only with a ' letter, and some matters so slight, that the council was ready to let ' him go at large; whereas, had he known these things he now charged against him, that was the proper time to mention them. Oates an

* From his printed trials and letters; the compendium, or short view of the trials relating to the plot; his dying speech; the continuator of Baker's chronicle, p. 691, 692, &c.

swered this, by complaining of the great fatigue he had undergone for two days and nights before, in seizing Jesuits, &c. which (he said) ⚫ had so exhausted his spirits, that he did not know what he said. This · was a wretched evasion, but it went down at that time. In the third ' place he said, that whereas Oates had swore he was privy to a consult about the 21st of August, in London, he offered to prove that he was then out of town,' having left London on the 15th of that month,

without ever returning till the 31st, late at night."

As to Bedloe, he could only answer him, by solemnly protesting ' he had never seen him till then in his life; and concluded his defence 'with an asseveration, that he had seen Oates but once before, and 'Bedloe never.' Baker's Chronicle, page 692.

The chief justice, in summing up the evidence, says Mr. Salmon, < in his examination of bishop Burnet's history, p. 792, did not much insist upon the testimony Oates had given of Coleman's design to • kill the king; but said, it was plain, that Coleman intended to bring in popery, and subvert the protestant religion, by requiring the assistance of a foreign power; and that he who subverted the protestant religion, by consequence brought in a foreign authority; that this was acting in derogation of the crown, and in diminution of the king's su premacy, and an endeavour to bring the nation under a foreign dominion, namely, the pope's; and though he might hope to bring in popery, by procuring a dissolution of the parliament, and a toleration, it was to be supposed, other methods would have been taken, if these had failed, by his confederates at least, if not by himself; and he who enters upon an unlawful act, is guilty of all the consequences that attend it, though he did not design them; whereupon Coleman was ' convicted.

The chief justice having pronounced the sentence, Coleman declared his innocency as to any design against the king's life; and said, ' he renounced all the mercy that God could shew him, if he had not ' discovered all he knew to the house of commons; or if he ever made, or received, or heard of any proposition towards invading the king's life, his crown or dignity; or to procure any invasion or disturbance, ⚫ in order to introduce any new form of government, or bring in popery by force; and in this he persisted till he died.' So Mr. Salmon, agree

ably to Mr. Coleman's printed trial.

The continuator of Baker's Chronicle adds, that before his execution, many were sent to him from both houses, with promise of a par'don, if he would make discoveries; but he either would not, or, which is as probable, could not make any such. So that some time after, "on Tuesday the 3d of December," he was executed, and suffered with great composedness and devotion, denying all that had been sworn against him. There went about an idle story, that he refused to confess upon promise of a pardon from the duke of York; and that when he found his death unavoidable, he cried out in a passion, there is no faith in man! But it was very plain, and he could not be ignorant, that the fury of the times was such, that the king had it not in 'his power to pardon him, if he had been ever so willing.' So far the protestant historian.