What was the Gunpowder Plot? Part 26
You’re reading novel What was the Gunpowder Plot? Part 26 online at LightNovelFree.com. Please use the follow button to get notification about the latest chapter next time when you visit LightNovelFree.com. Use F11 button to read novel in full-screen(PC only). Drop by anytime you want to read free – fast – latest novel. It’s great if you could leave a comment, share your opinion about the new chapters, new novel with others on the internet. We’ll do our best to bring you the finest, latest novel everyday. Enjoy!
_May 20th, 1604._ [Besides Garnet, Greenway, Gerard, "and other Jesuits,"] there met together T. Winter, Faukes, Keyes, Bates, Catesby, Percy, the two Wrights, and Tresham, by whom the Plot was approved and undertaken.
_March 31st, 1605_, R. Winter, Grant, and Rokewood were enlisted.
[No mention is made of Digby, who was separately arraigned, nor in his arraignment is any date specified.]
2. According to Faukes' confession of November 17th, 1605, Percy, Catesby, T. Winter, J. Wright, and himself were the first a.s.sociates.
Soon afterwards C. Wright was added. After Christmas, Keyes was initiated and received the oath. At a later period, Digby, Rokewood, Tresham, Grant, and R. Winter were brought in. Bates is not mentioned.
[In this doc.u.ment the names of Keyes and R. Winter have been interchanged, in Cecil's writing, and thus it was printed: the latter being made to appear as an earlier confederate.]
3. According to T. Winter's declaration of November 23rd, 1605, Catesby, J. Wright, and himself were the first a.s.sociates, Percy and Faukes being presently added. Keyes was enlisted before Michaelmas, C. Wright after Christmas, Digby at a later period, and Tresham "last of all." No others are mentioned.
4. Keyes--November 30th, 1605--says that he was inducted a little before Midsummer, 1604.
5. R. Winter and Grant (January 17th, 1605-6) fix January, 1604-5, for their introduction to the conspiracy, and Bates (December 4th, 1605) gives the preceding December for his. Neither date agrees with that of the indictment in support of which these confessions were cited.
6. There is, of course, no evidence of any kind to show that Father Garnet and the "other Jesuits" ever had any conference with the conspirators, nor was such a charge urged on his trial.
7. Sir Everard Digby's case is exceptionally puzzling. All the evidence represents him as having been initiated late in September, or early in October, 1605. Among the Hatfield MSS., however, there is a letter addressed to Sir Everard, by one G. D., and dated June 11th, 1605, which treats ostensibly of a hunt for "the otter that infesteth your brooks," to be undertaken when the hay has been cut, but has been endorsed by Cecil himself, "Letter written to Sir Everard Digby--_Powder Treason_;" the minister thus attributing to him a knowledge of the Plot, more than three months before it was ever alleged that he heard of it.
APPENDIX G. (p. 94).
_Henry Wright the Informer._
1. _Letter to Sir T. Challoner, April, 1604._ [_Gunpowder Plot Book_, n.
236.]
Good Sir Thomas, I am as eager for setting of the lodgings as you can be, and in truth whereas we desired but twenty, the discoverer had set and (if we accept it) can set above three score, but I told him that the State would take it for good service if he set twenty of the most princ.i.p.al Jesuits and seminary priests, and therewithal I gave him thirteen or fourteen names picked out of his own notes, among the which five of them were sworn to the secresy. He saith absolutely that by G.o.d's grace he will do it ere long, but he stayeth some few days purposely for the coming to town of Tesmond [Greenway] and Kempe, two princ.i.p.als; their lodgings are prepared, and they will be here, as he saith for certain, within these two days. For the treason, Davies neither hath nor will unfold himself for the discovery of it till he hath his pardon for it under seal, as I told you, which is now in great forwardness, and ready to be sealed so that you shall know all.... Your wors.h.i.+p's most devoted,
HEN. WRIGHT.
[A pardon to Joseph Davies for all treasons and other offences appears on the Pardon Roll, April 25th, 1605, thus supplying the approximate date of the above letter.]
2. _Application to the King._ [_Gunpowder Plot Book_, n. 237.]
"If it may please your Majesty, can you remember that the Lord Chief Justice Popham and Sir Thomas Challoner, Kt., had a hand in the discovery of the practices of the Jesuits in the powder, and did from time reveal the same to your Majesty, for two years' s.p.a.ce almost before the said treason burst forth by an obscure letter to the Lord Mounteagle, which your Majesty, like an angel of G.o.d, interpreted, touching the blow, then intended to have been given by powder. The man that informed Sir Thomas Challoner and the Lord Popham of the said Jesuitical practices, their meetings and traitorous designs in that matter, whereof from time to time they informed your Majesty, was one Wright, who hath your Majesty's hand for his so doing, and never received any reward for his pains and charges laid out concerning the same. This Wright, if occasion serve, can do more service."
[_Addressed_, "Mr. Secretary Conway."
_Headed_, "Touching Wright and his services performed in the d.a.m.nable plot of the Powder treason."]
APPENDIX H. (p. 119).
_Lord Monteagle to King James_, (British Museum MSS. Add. 19402, f.
146.)
"MOST gracious Soveraine.--Your maiestyes tender and fatherly love over me, In admonis.h.i.+nge me heartofore, to seake resolution In matter of religion, geves me both occasion, and Incouragement, as humbly to thanke your maiestye for this care of my soules good, so to crave leave of gevinge into your maiestyes hand this accompt, that your wisdome, seinge the course and end of my proceadinges, might rest a.s.sured that by the healp of G.o.d, I will [live and] dye, In that religion which I have nowe resolved to profes.
"It may please your maiestye therfore to knowe, that as I was breed upp In the Romish religion and walked in that, because I knew no better, so have I not sodainely or lightly made the chaunge, which nowe I desire to be seane In, for I speake, Sir, as before him that shall Judg my soule, I have by praier, for G.o.d his gidance, and with voues to him, to walk in that light he should shew me, and by longe carefull and diligent readinge, and conference with lerned men, on both sides, and impartiall examination of ther profes and argumentes, come to discerne the Ignorance I was formerly wrapped In, as I nowe wonder that ether my self, or any other of common understandinge, showld bee so blynded, as to Imbrace that G.o.ds trewth, [_sic_] which I nowe perseyue to be grounded uppon so weake foundations. And as I never could digest all poyntes therin, wherof not few seamed to bee made for gaine and ambition, of the papacye, so nowe I fynde that the hole frame and bodye of that religion (wherin they oppose us) difereth from the platforme, which G.o.d him self hath recorded In the holy scriptures, and hath In length of tyme, by the Ignorance and deceiptfulness of men, bene peaced together, and is now maintayned by factious obstinacye, and certain coulerable pretences, such as the wittes and learninge of men, are able to cast uppon any humaine errors, which they list to uphowld. Nether have I left any thinge I doubted of untried or unresolued, becawse I did Intend and desire to so take up the trewth of G.o.d, once discouered to me, as neuer to suffer yt to bee questioned any more In my owne consienc. And In all this, Sir, I protest to your maiestye, before almightye G.o.d, I have simply and only propounded to my self the trew seruise of G.o.d, and saluation of my owne soule, Not gaine, not honor, no not that which I doe most highly valew, your maiestyes fauour, or better opinion of me. Nether on the other side am I affraide of those censures of men whether of the partye I have abandoned, or of others which I shall Incur by this alteration, howldinge yt contentment Innough to my self, That G.o.d hath in mercye enlightened my mynde to see his sacred trewth, with desire to serue [the paper here is mutilated].... And rest, your maie[styes] most loyall and obedient servant W. Mownteagle."
_Addressed_, "To the Kinge his most excellent Maiestye."
From the absence of any allusion to the Powder Plot and its "discovery,"
it appears certain that this letter must have been written previously to it.
On August 1st, 1609, Sir Wm. Waad wrote to Salisbury that the disorders of Lord Monteagle's house were an offence to the country. At this period he appears to have been suspected of concealing Catholic students from St. Omers. [_Calendar of State Papers._]
APPENDIX I. (p. 140).
_Epitaph in St. Anne's, Aldersgate._ [Maitland, London (1756), p. 1065.]
"_Peter Heiwood_, younger son of _Peter Heiwood_, one of the Counsellors of _Jamaica_, ... Great Grandson to _Peter Heiwood_ of _Heywood_ in the County Palestine of _Lancaster_; who apprehended _Guy Faux_ with his dark Lanthorn; and for his zealous prosecution of Papists, as Justice of Peace, was stabbed in _Westminster-Hall_ by _John James_, a _Dominican_ Friar, An. Dom. 1640. Obiit _Novem. 2. 1701_.
Reader, if not a Papist bred Upon such Ashes gently tread."
It is to be presumed that the person who died in 1701 is not the same who was stabbed in 1640, or who discovered Guy Faukes in 1605.
The Dominican records contain no trace of any member of the Order named John James, nor does so remarkable an event as the stabbing of a Justice of Peace in Westminster Hall appear to be chronicled elsewhere.
Peter Heywood, J.P. for Westminster, was active as a magistrate as late as December 15th, 1641. [_Calendar of State Papers._]
APPENDIX K. (p. 173).
_The Use of Torture._
THERE can be no doubt that torture was freely employed to extract evidence from the conspirators and others who fell into the hands of the government.
The Earl of Salisbury, in his letter to Favat, of December 4th, 1605, clearly intimates that this was the case, when he complains "most of the prisoners have wilfully forsworn that the priests knew anything in particular, and obstinately refuse to be accusers of them, _yea, what torture soever they be put to_."
About the middle of November, Lord Dunfermline wrote to Salisbury [_Dom.
James I._ xvi. 81] recommending that the prisoners should be confined apart and in darkness, that they should be examined by torchlight, and that the tortures should be slow and at intervals, as being thus most effectual.
There is every reason to believe that the Jesuit lay-brother, Nicholas Owen, _alias_ Littlejohn, actually died upon the rack. [_Vide_ Father Gerard's _Narrative of the Gunpowder Plot_, p. 189.]
What was the Gunpowder Plot? Part 26
You're reading novel What was the Gunpowder Plot? Part 26 online at LightNovelFree.com. You can use the follow function to bookmark your favorite novel ( Only for registered users ). If you find any errors ( broken links, can't load photos, etc.. ), Please let us know so we can fix it as soon as possible. And when you start a conversation or debate about a certain topic with other people, please do not offend them just because you don't like their opinions.
What was the Gunpowder Plot? Part 26 summary
You're reading What was the Gunpowder Plot? Part 26. This novel has been translated by Updating. Author: John Gerard already has 570 views.
It's great if you read and follow any novel on our website. We promise you that we'll bring you the latest, hottest novel everyday and FREE.
LightNovelFree.com is a most smartest website for reading novel online, it can automatic resize images to fit your pc screen, even on your mobile. Experience now by using your smartphone and access to LightNovelFree.com