Whereas it was now plainly and directly known unto the Council (by the means and in the manner aforesaid) how far this matter could be laid unto Father Garnett's charge; and that they had no further expectation to find him guilty of any help or furtherance at all given by him to this Powder Treason, it was resolved to proceed against him only upon his simple knowledge thereof which he had received in confession; esteeming it not fit to let go this opportunity, sith no greater advantage could be gotten; especially seeing by this time all men were full of expectation what would become of the matter after so long time of trial and so many and strict examinations. It was hoped also, that howsoever he might excuse himself from fault in the sight of God for not revealing the seal and secret of confession, yet that he could not justify it before the world: it being accounted treason by the laws of England to know of treason intended and not to reveal it. In which law (now) the knowledge which is had by confession is not excepted; because confession itself being in England rejected, the good and necessity of the secrecy thereof is not so much esteemed, as their public peace and prosperous proceedings in their worldly estate. Upon this ground therefore it was hoped they had matter enough against Father Garnett both to make him odious to the people, and all Jesuits for his sake; and therefore it was intended, that his trial should be performed in the most public and solemn manner they could devise, thereby to [pg 225] disgrace the more both him and his religion; for so in express words the Earl of Salisbury did twice publicly affirm in the time of his arraignment; and that otherwise such preparation and solemnity had not been needful for the arraignment of a poor religious man, and said “he held himself much honoured that day to be an assistant where God's cause should be so much honoured” (meaning the Protestants' religion). And how should this be performed? “By discrediting,” said he, “the person of Garnett, on whom the common adversary had thought to confer the usurpation of so eminent jurisdiction.” So that one may see plainly the whole day's work was bent against religion; and whatsoever was pretended against Father Garnett in this matter, all was directly intended “in odium Catholicæ Fidei.”408 And so we may see in the process of the accusation, when the Attorney brought against Father Garnett all other former matter that had been forged against the martyrs in Queen Elizabeth's time, with which (if they had been true) yet they could no more have charged Father Garnett with them in justice, than the child that was then unborn.

Therefore the day appointed being come, which was a Friday, the 28th March, about eight of the clock, he was brought from the Tower in a coach with the Lieutenant of the Tower, Sir William Wade, and another Knight, the curtains being close drawn about them. Which manner of carriage to judgment being very extraordinary and not used to any before him, the people did much wonder at it, and thought it strange he should be so carried, considering that most of those that were indeed conspirators in the treason were men of better birth and blood than he (which by them is much respected) and yet were used in much different manner. But some did more truly guess that this was not done for any grace unto him (whom they sought to disgrace in all they could), but [pg 226] to grace their own cause, by making him seem a man of greatest account amongst the Papists, against whom they meant to object and hoped to prove the Powder Treason, and so all Papists to be as it were proved guilty in him they chiefly esteemed and followed. But the curtains doubtless were kept close, that the people might not be moved with the sight of so reverend a man, or he moved upon any occasion to speak unto them in his own clearing.

There were set in place of judgment in the Guildhall the Lord Mayor of London (who in that Court is the King's Lieutenant), the Lord Charles Howard, Earl of Nottingham, the Lord Thomas Howard, Earl of Suffolk, the Lord Somerset, Earl of Worcester, the Lord Henry Howard, Earl of Northampton, the Lord Robert Cecil, Earl of Salisbury, with Sir John Popham, Lord Chief Justice of England, the Lord Chief Baron, and Justice Yelverton, Commissioners for His Majesty in that behalf, The Lieutenant of the Tower being come with Father Garnett to the place of judgment, he returned his writ unto the Council (by virtue whereof he had kept the prisoner) together with the body of the prisoner there present.409

The indictment was read and the prisoner called to hold up his hand at the bar, as the fashion is. The effect of the indictment was this. “That Henry Garnett, alias Walley, alias Farmer, alias Darcy, had conspired with Robert Catesby and the rest of his confederates (the 9th of June last past, in the parish of St Michael in the ward of Queenhithe in London) to withdraw the hearts of the subjects from their due obedience to God and their King, and to deprive the King of his crown, to kill him and the Prince, and to slaughter the whole Parliament assembled, to raise rebellion, to change religion, to ruin the commonwealth and to bring in strangers: and that this 9th of [pg 227] June he met with Catesby and Tesimond and did treat of means to accomplish the same, and did conclude that Winter, Faulks and others should blow up with powder the Parliament House.” To this indictment the prisoner pleaded “not guilty,” and for his trial referred himself to God and his country as the manner is. Whereupon a jury of substantial citizens was impanelled, and twelve of them sworn to try the issue between His Majesty and Henry Garnett according to the evidence produced against him; which being done, the indictment was read the second time, and then Sir John Crooke, Knight, the King's Serjeant, began to plead in this manner (as near as it could be remembered by two or three sufficient men that were present and did carefully observe both that and all the other speeches).

“ ‘Nihil est occultum,’ ” said he, “ ‘quod non manifestabitur; nihil secretum quod non revelabitur.’410 Thus saith the Truth itself, ‘qui consilium pravorum dissipat:’411 which as it is generally true, so is the truth thereof laid open in the discovery of the late horrible treason, which though it were closely carried, yet by the providence of God, it hath been most apparently revealed. And truly when I cast mine eyes upon this prisoner, the rotten root of this corrupted tree of treason, I am stricken with great horror to think that under the cover of so grave a countenance, should lurk such a poisoned heart. He is a man, ‘multorum nominum sed nullius boni nominis’412—of no good name, nor honest conversation, but infamous for many treasons, and especially for this last and most abominable treason, whereby he intended the subversion of the King, Queen, Prince, State, and religion; and for testimony of his guiltiness therein,” he said, “they should have ‘loquentia [pg 228] signa, testimonia rerum,’ and ‘confitentem reum,’ nay, ‘reos confitentes,’413 that is the persons guilty accusing one the other. We have,” said he, “Garnett and Hall accusing Greenway, as shall be laid open by the ensuing discourse of him to whom it belongeth.”

This speech being ended, Sir Edward Coke, His Majesty's Attorney-General, began his speech with a low voice, that so his words could not at the first be so distinctly heard: but it tended to this effect. “That this was a later act of this horrible Powder Treason, that first he craved pardon of their Lordships that he might reiterate some things of which he had formerly discoursed, ‘quia nunquam nimis dicitur, quod nunquam satis discitur.’414 Secondly, he craved pardon that without offence to any he might nominate some great persons, who were sometimes interested in some of these causes; but he would do it without any disgrace at all unto their persons, because,” said he, “there is great difference to be made between times of hostility and times of amity. Thirdly, he desired to satisfy two sorts of people that might marvel this execution of justice should be so long deferred; the first of such, as might think such delays inconvenient lest the impunity of the malefactors might seem to patronize the offence; the second of such persons, as might think the delay of trial argued his clearness in the cause. To those both he answered, that the Lords of the Council (whose great wisdom he would not in that place much commend, because ‘coram laudare est clam vituperare’415) had spent many days in examinations of those affairs, and that the prisoner had been twenty-three [times] examined; so that the trial could not have been much sooner.” (But this seemed to many rather an excuse than [pg 229] accusation to the prisoner, in whom there could not with so much labour and in so long time be found any crime to be justly imposed, for “frustra fit per plura quod fieri potest per pauciora.”416) “But to draw nearer the cause of the prisoner,” said Mr. Attorney. “Henry Garnett, alias Walley, &c, is a man grave, discreet, wise, learned, and of excellent ornaments both of nature and arts.” (He might have added grace also, if he had had grace to see it.) “And one that, if he will, may do His Majesty as much good service as any subject I know in England.” (By this and the like speeches which it seems they used often, to work him to yield from profession of his faith, it is apparent they would have given him both life and much preferment, if he had not rather chosen to die for God than to live to the world.) “Besides this man,” saith he, “was a scholar in Winchester, from thence went to Oxford, and there was well esteemed.” (This Mr. Attorney did mistake, for he was never student in Oxford.) “But he hath abused his learning to the ruin of his country, as we shall hereafter declare in the discourse following, wherein I will speak of nothing but of this late horrible treason; which treason for distinction sake, I will call the Jesuits' treason: for the Jesuits were the authors thereof; therefore I will not do them the wrong to take from them anything which is theirs, especially seeing in every crime ‘plus peccat author quam actor,’417 as it appeareth by Adam and Eve and the serpent.” (But here he presupposeth Father Garnett had counselled the Plot, as the indictment had said before, but that never was, nor ever can be proved.) “In this discourse I will speak of circumstances and observations touching the matter in hand: of no other circumstances but of treason, and of no other treasons but the Jesuits' treasons; and of no other Jesuits' treasons but such as shall particularly concern this prisoner, seeing all have been practised, since he was [pg 230] their Superior; and these circumstances I will divide into precedent, concurrent, and subsequent.

“For the precedent circumstances; you must understand this man hath been in England this twenty years, and from the very first hour he set foot in England hath been a notorious traitor, because he came in contrary to a statute made the year before his coming in, Anno 27º. of our late sovereign of happy memory, whereby it was made high treason for any Priest that had received Orders from any authority derived from the See of Rome beyond the seas, which I beseech your Lordships to observe; for of Queen Mary's Priests nothing was spoken in the law.” (And the reason hereof is given in the former ——418 chapter, but here it is apparent, that this treason so earnestly urged, was merely matter of religion, as in all former martyrs.) “Contrary to which statute this prisoner came in, and by consequence at that very instant was a traitor. But he will say, this is a new law; these laws were never heard of before Luther's days; this law is a cruel law, a bloody law, prohibiting men to exercise their function, to gain souls to God; and that their religion is the old religion, where ours is the new and confined in England, where on the contrary side their religion is universal and embraced of the greatest part of this Christian world. And thus for the maintenance of their rotten religion, do they seek to disgrace our gospel and do calumniate just laws with title of cruelty. But to this I answer,” saith he, “that if our religion be as ancient as Luther, it is more ancient than the Jesuits are.419 Albeit it neither be contained in those narrow limits of place, nor bounds of time, which they feignedly imagine, having been ever since the time of Christ [pg 231] and His Apostles. For we do not deny but Rome was the Mother Church and had thirty-two virginal Martyrs for her Popes a row; and so continued till in succeeding ages it brought in a mass of errors and idle ceremonies. But you will ask, where our Church lurked before Luther's coming for some hundreds of years. But I say it makes no great matter where it was, so that I be certain it was; for as a wedge of gold, if it be mixed with a mass of other metal,” &c. (By your leave, Mr. Attorney, if I know not where the true Church is, I cannot be of it: if I be not of it, I cannot be saved: and if this be no matter to you, yet to God's children it is a great matter. And your simile of the wedge is lame of all the feet: for the Church if it be invisible to all men is gone, “quia ore fit confessio ad salutem,”420 and so Christ had no true servants on earth; but this is like your dream before that the true Church could degenerate into errors, and yet those coming in, no man being able to name the time, the place, nor the person, that did alter any substantial point of faith. But can Mr. Attorney think that Christ our Lord would put His candle under a bushel, which He had lighted with so great labour? And that which He saith no man will do, as being an idle and foolish thing, yet will Mr. Attorney have the Wisdom of God to do? But good Mr. Attorney, give me leave to believe Christ our Lord before you; and therefore that the city could not be hid which Christ had built upon a hill. And so your imagined gold is turned into alchymy, and passeth away in smoke; but if the material wedge of gold be hid, men say you know where to find it, if you will but search your coffers with half the pains you took to find out this invisible wedge of gold. Pardon me for this digression, I could not well let such false follies pass without a word or two; but I will not trouble the reader any more, but leave it to others: neither should I or any other have had need to admonish Mr. Attorney, if Father Garnett had been [pg 232] suffered to speak at large, as he was often of set purpose interrupted. But let us proceed in Mr. Attorney his speech.) “For as a wedge of gold, if it be dissolved and mixed with a mass of brass or other metal, it doth not lose its nature, but remaineth gold still, although we cannot determine in what part of the mass it is contained, but the touch-stone will find that out; so though our Church hath ever been since Christ His time in the world, yet being mixed and covered with innovations and errors we cannot tell in what part it was.” (This is the truest word in all Mr. Attorney his speech, but presently linked with the contrary, for he saith:) “And I dare say it is now more extended than theirs is, for we have all England, all Scotland, all Germany, all Denmark, a great part of France, all Poland, and some part of Italy. Now as for the statute which they call a bloody and cruel statute, I will make it apparent to be the mildest law, the sweetest law, the law most full of mercy and pity,” (It is a great pity it were not executed upon Mr. Attorney:) “that ever was enacted by any Prince so injuriously provoked as she was. And if I prove not this, then let the world say that Garnett is an honest man. And to prove this, we must remember that Pius or rather Impius Quintus, the Pope, in the eleventh year of our late Queen deceased, sent over a Bull of Excommunication against Her Majesty, discharging all her subjects from their allegiance, whereupon arose the insurrection in the North, and other rebellions, for which divers were apprehended and executed. And here we may observe the misery of Popish Catholics, who if they do obey the Bulls of the Pope are apprehended and hanged as traitors; and if they do not obey them, are by the Pope excommunicated and cursed. But to go forward: from this excommunication also proceeded that the Popish Catholics refused to come to our churches; so that the reason of refusal is not religion, but the Pope's Bull, which now being not of force, there is no doubt but that they both may and will come to [pg 233] our churches.” (False.) “Then after the suppression of the rebels in the North, the Popish Catholics being thought too weak to make a party, then did the Pope give them a toleration ‘rebus sic stantibus et donec commoda executio Bullæ fieri posset.’421 Then to make a party of Popish Catholics against the Queen, was sent in Campion and a crew of Priests with him, that laboured to pervert Her Majesty's subjects and draw them to bloody practices, which Her Majesty sought to prevent, and withal out of her singular clemency made a law, and that the fullest of pity that could be devised, to wit, That they should keep themselves there (beyond the seas), and not to come into her dominions under pain of high treason. Now tell me I pray you, was this law made to spill their blood?” (Yes, either to spill the Blood of Christ by the loss of souls, if the Priests came not in, or if they did, then theirs.) “No, it was made to save their blood, by keeping them there, which by coming hither would be spilt in bloody practices” (which were fathered upon them, that it might not seem to be cause of religion.) “Then comes in Garnett in the twenty-seventh year of the Queen. His purpose was to prepare the way against the great compounded navy, which may well be called a compounded navy, because it consisted of the ships of all nations in Christendom, that either they could beg, hire, or borrow. He came in, I say, to be the forerunner of this navy. The Pope was the inciter and the Spaniards the actors; and this great navy was overthrown, not so much by our power, as by themselves, their own ships severing and scattering them. So that we may well apply those verses to our late sovereign, which Claudian sung to his Emperor Theodosius:

“But was this a sufficient warning to the Romish Catholics to desist from their treasonable practices? No, for when they saw that open invasion served not their turn, they took themselves to private treacheries; insomuch that I dare boldly say” (but not truly) “there passed no four years without some one or other treason. For shortly after came Patrick Collyn, sent from Father Holt and Father Sherwood, two Jesuits, to kill the Queen. Shortly after cometh Lopez to poison the Queen, incited likewise by the instigation of the Jesuits.” (This Lopez was a Jew, the Queen's physician, living in London, a rich man, and knew no Jesuit in the world, nor was acquainted with any Catholics in England that I know of.) “After him came Yorke and Williams from Father Holt, who likewise had plotted to kill the Queen. Not long after him comes Squire, sent by Father Walpole from Spain, to poison Her Majesty.” And here Mr. Attorney desired licence to advertise the Lords that each of these treasons were accompanied with some devilish book. “As for example, the plot of Patrick Collyn was accompanied with the book of Philopater written by Cresswell the Jesuit, their ledger in Spain. Then cometh Squire with his plot, and this was accompanied with another most pernicious book written by Dolman, alias Persons, their great ledger423 in Rome. And now we are come to the Spanish treason, which was in the forty-fourth year of our late sovereign. And that you may know there was a Spanish treason, you shall understand that Thomas Winter, and Father Greenway, alias Tesimond, the Jesuit, went over commended by Garnett to offer their obedience and service to the King of Spain, and to promise him their assistance, when time should serve for advancement of his title to the crown of England, and withal to entreat him to send them an army, to be conveyed hither by the galleys of Spinola; which army, if it were great, should land in Kent; if it were small, it might land at [pg 235] Milford Haven; that they should bring with them a round sum of money, and in the meantime to bestow some annual pensions upon certain discontented persons here; and that they for their part would prepare two thousand horses, which in such attempts were like to be the greatest want. This motion being made to the King, they were brought unto him; from him they were directed to the Duke of Lerma, who received them gracefully, and finally for their answer they were referred to the Conde de Miranda, who assured them the King his master liked very well of their motion and would be ready to further them in their just request, and would henceforward account the English as his own Castilians. With this resolution Thomas Winter and Greenway returned, expecting the next summer the arrival of their navy. And here were not wanting the books I mentioned before; but what books? They had no books indeed; but that want was supplied with two Breves or Bulls, as we call them, and they were most pernicious and treacherous, which by God's providence came lately to light. The first was directed ‘Principibus et Nobilibus Catholicis totius Regni Anglicani.’424 The tenour of this first was an admonition that ‘postquam contigerit miseram fœminam e vitâ excedere,’ ”425 &c. Here you may mark this foul-mouthed monster that calleth our dread sovereign of happy memory, “miseram fœminam;” being one of the most renowned of Princes. (Here the reader indeed hath cause to mark a foul mouth, that durst call the Vicegerent of God Himself a foul-mouthed monster; nor will he mark that the Bull speaking only of the time after the Queen's death, was not to accompany the army, which, if any such were intended, was to come at a certain prefixed time; yea, it rather showeth the Pope would have nothing attempted in her lifetime.) “But well,” saith he, “what followeth in the Bull? Marry, when it shall happen that miserable woman [pg 236] shall depart this life, they shall not admit of any other to succeed in her place, ‘quâcumque propinquitate sanguinis niteretur,’426 except that first they promise not only to tolerate the Catholic religion, but also do bind themselves by oath to maintain it and no other: and this to deprive King James from his rightful inheritance” (nay, rather to move him to be Catholic, and so to get him also a much greater kingdom in Heaven). “To exclude him therefore cometh this roaring Bull, that warned them also to give notice of her sickness or death, as soon as may be, when it should happen, to his Legate in Flanders. And so accordingly presently upon her indisposition, Christopher Wright was despatched with letters of commendation from Garnett the Jesuit, as appeared by a confession then produced and read. And here, my Lords, let me observe another circumstance very markable; that these peculiar traitors were severally commended by Garnett the Jesuit, as for example, Thomas Winter went over: wherefore? For treason; and yet was he commended by Garnett the Jesuit. Christopher Wright went over: wherefore? For treason; and yet was he likewise commended by Garnett the Jesuit. Guy Faulks was sent over: wherefore? For treason—that is, to solicit and deal with Owen, that Spinola and Sir William Stanley might draw their forces near to the sea-side, that when the time served they might come over with the more expedition: and yet he also is commended by Garnett the Jesuit. Sir Edward Baynham was sent over to acquaint the Pope with this business, when the blow should be given” (By this known untruth the rest may be judged of the better:) “which Edward Baynham was a fit messenger between the Pope and the devil; and yet he had also letters of commendation from Garnett the Jesuit. So that hereby it is apparent that Garnett was not only privy, but consenting to their several practices. Now when King James was settled in this kingdom, and received of all, then did Garnett burn the Bull. But out of [pg 237] that Bull did Catesby infer that it was lawful for him to entertain any practice against our sovereign that now is; for, said he, it is as lawful for us to expel him and cast him out now, seeing by experience he doth persecute religion, as by the Breve it was lawful to resist him and reject, when we did but fear he would not favour Catholics.” (True it is Mr. Catesby did argue thus; but was answered by Father Garnett, that the case was not like before and after admission, and that we must not by ourselves attempt anything, the Pope now commanding to be quiet.) “The other Bull was to the Archpriest and his associates, commending their patience and longanimity, and willing them to counsel all sorts of lay people to be forward in execution of the Pope's command. Well then, out of these circumstances, I infer that Garnett was not only privy, but an author and actor in this treason.

“But now let us consider other circumstances that are ‘omni acceptione majores.’427 Your Lordships must understand that Garnett would not be known to any of the actors in these bloody practices, but only to Catesby, being a man ‘vafro et versuto ingenio et profundâ perfidiâ,’428 so that all we have against him must be chiefly drawn from himself.” (Indeed Mr. Catesby was dead, and never affirmed any such thing, and the rest of the conspirators in their examinations and public speeches affirmed the contrary; so that Mr. Attorney did want proof very much, when he brought in a dead man to be witness, like to them that brought the sleeping soldiers at Christ His sepulchre to be witnesses that his body was stolen whilst they were asleep.) “Well then, this Garnett confesseth that Catesby had in general imparted to him that something would be done by the Catholics, but could not reveal in particular what it was without the consent of two others of his consorts, which Garnett saith he dissuaded him from; but how know we [pg 238] that he did so? Only by his own words, who useth to deal sincerely in nothing that concerneth himself. But I will prove that he did not dissuade them, but did encourage them, even to the Powder Treason itself.” (Here, by the way, I would gladly ask Mr. Attorney how he doth save the accusation recited in the indictment from a false slander, where it is said that Garnett and Greenway did in the beginning meet with Catesby at Queenhithe, and there conclude upon destroying the King and Queen and the Parliament House by powder? How could this be true, seeing that here now long after, and after the gentlemen had concluded as it seems of the matter, and bound one another to secrecy, so that as you see Mr. Catesby could not reveal it to Father Garnett without leave of two others, Father Garnett was all this while ignorant of it: yea, and now also had but a general knowledge of something to be done, from which also he dissuaded them? We may see in this contradiction Father Garnett his innocency; and that Mr. Attorney should be mindful of what he hath said, if he will not say the truth. But let us see how he seeketh to prove by likelihoods, that here Father Garnett, getting some knowledge of the thing in general, did persuade it in particular.) “For Father Garnett,” said he, “confesseth moreover that Mr. Catesby did in general terms propound a case unto him, whether it were not lawful to destroy many enemies assembled together to our ruin, although some innocents must needs be inwrapped in the slaughter. To this Garnett answered that in just war when a town or castle is besieged that could not be taken without battering the walls, and that not to be performed without perishing of some innocents, in that case, if the advantage which redounded to the general good by the death of those enemies were greater than the loss should be by the destruction of those innocents, that then it was lawful. I beseech your Lordships [pg 239] mark here, that Garnett approveth this fact in particular; for this resolution was Catesby's whole ground; and this I prove by Rookwood his confession (which he brought forth), and therein it appeared that when Catesby made the first overture of this matter unto him, he conceived great horror of the fact in respect of the innocents that were to be there, whereunto Catesby answered, that he had advice of the most learned, that it was lawful, not by proposing the case in particular, but in a like.” (Here Mr. Attorney, by his plain proof which he promised, hath proved himself to be guilty of a malicious and false inference, and Father Garnett to be clear from all furtherance to the Plot. For, first, this case was put to Father Garnett before the time this general notice of something in hand was given him by Mr. Catesby: though here Mr. Attorney did maliciously put it after, to make it seem that Father Garnett might gather some light what should be meant by them, hearing now this particular case out of the former general knowledge, which the Attorney saith he had before received. But the general knowledge came after, which I prove by these alleged words of Mr. Attorney. For here he saith, he had resolution in this case before he acquainted Rookwood; and that general knowledge was given after the matter was commenced: for, so he said, there was something in hand, but he could not tell him without leave of two; at which time Father Garnett refused to know the matter, but dissuaded it in general. Now that he proveth also Father Garnett clear from persuasion or consent, I prove by his own words, where he saith that Mr. Catesby persuaded Mr. Rookwood to yield, upon the resolution he had received of the like case, not of the same case; whereby it appears, they first concluded of it amongst themselves, and the rest consented to it, without Father Garnett his knowledge or privity, much less his counsel. Now whereas Mr. Attorney will needs conclude, that because Mr. Catesby did infer the lawfulness of the [pg 240] particular out of the resolution in general, therefore Father Garnett should be guilty of the powder; by the same reason he may prove many Doctors in the Schools, and the most learned writers that are or have been, to be guilty of the same treason; for they deliver the same doctrine in the same case, as it was put to Father Garnett. And as they, being wholly ignorant of the matter, cannot be touched with it, for delivering their true opinion, so Father Garnett, when that case was put, thought of nothing less than that they had any such intent. And afterward when he perceived something in general, that he also laboured to hinder by persuasion: and so no way to be blamed, but much to be commended, if he had his right).

Now for the subsequent circumstances Mr. Attorney produced, an interlocution between Father Garnett and Father Ouldcorne in the Tower; which thing is before declared at large and therefore needs not here be set down, the chapter growing too long by other points not before so much declared. Only this here is to be noted, that Mr. Attorney reported the matter otherwise than it was; for he said, that by reason the Tower was full of prisoners, the Lieutenant was constrained for want of room to lodge them in two chambers joining one upon another, which they perceiving did often discourse together, and being overheard by the Lieutenant's men passing to other prisoners, some of them were placed near adjoining to overhear them.431 And so out of that interlocution, and Father Garnett his confession taken by the Lords after the same, he proved that Father Garnett was told in confession of the Powder Treason; which point alone he was able to prove against Father Garnett, and the which Father Garnett acknowledged, but proved it to be both lawful and necessary for him to proceed as he did therein. Then Mr. Attorney began to exaggerate the greatness of the treason, because it was intended against so worthy a Prince, and so noble a progeny, in whose praises he spent a long time; but not needful to be set down in this place. Then he praised and sought to please the City of London, affirming that the King, in desire to give contentment unto the city, had caused that solemn trial to be made in that place, which belonged to the public justice of the city.

Then he returned to Father Garnett, and said that he and the Jesuits had plotted these foresaid treasons against all these so worthy persons; and that the Jesuits were Doctors of four D's; first of Dissimulation, wherein he made an invective against the doctrine of equivocation, showing a [pg 242] written book of that matter which had been taken in some search, the title whereof was written with Father Garnett his own hand, “Against lying and untruths;” and, said Mr. Attorney,432 “If this doctrine might be admitted, that men may swear and forswear what they list, there would be no martyrs: the holy Ridley, Cranmer, and Latimer would not have been martyred.” (These were three notorious heretics burnt in Queen Mary's time.) “The thirty-two Popes, that were virginal martyrs, would not have suffered on a row. This doctrine was begun by Arius, who having a schedule of the Catholic doctrine in his left hand, and another of his own opinion in his bosom, laid his right hand upon his breast and sware he believed and would maintain that doctrine he had in his hand during his life.” (Many such things he said against “equivocatio,” either mistaking or misreporting wholly the state of the question.) The second D, he said, was Deposing of Princes, for which he produced a place out of Philopater, affirming that heretics cannot bear rule over Catholics; and another out of Dolman's book of titles to the like effect, also two places of Simanha, whom he termed the Spanish Jesuit. The first, that all heretics were excommunicate de jure at Easter, and were excommunicate de facto. The second was that a Prince once excommunicate “amittit jus regnandi;”433 and not only for himself, but for his heirs. The third D, is the Disposing of kingdoms, for proof whereof, he alleged that they would have disposed of the kingdom of England to the Infanta of Spain, without any memory of King James. The fourth and last D, was the Deterring of Princes with fear of their excommunications, and I know not what. And then, with some invectives against Jesuits, he dehorted all men from conversing with them, with this saying, “Qui cum Jesu itis, non itis cum Jesuitis.” “Neither,” said he, “are [pg 243] their Priests less perilous than they of whom I hope I may presage the destruction near at hand; for seeing I am informed they are in number about four hundred, they may fitly be resembled to the four hundred false prophets that Micheas had in his company;434 for as they were possessed of lying spirits and then perishing, so may we hope that these Priests and Jesuits publicly teaching this doctrine of lying and equivocating are near their downfall.” And then making a low reverence he concluded his speech.

Mr. Attorney having ended,435 Father Garnett, having first made his reverence with a very modest countenance began his speech, first craving pardon for the weakness of his memory, if he should fail to give them satisfaction in any particular that had been objected against him. “But I trust,” said he, “with the help of Mr. Attorney, I shall fail in nothing of consequence. And considering the whole discourse of Mr. Attorney, I find the things by him treated of, may be reduced to four principal heads: the first, concerning our doctrine in general; the second, concerning recusants in general; third, concerning Jesuits in general; the last, concerning myself in particular.