THE ANSWER OF Sir Willam Scroggs, Kt. Lord Chief Justice of the King's-Bench, TO THE ARTICLES OF Dr. TITUS OATS, and Mr. WILLIAM BEDLOW.  
I. TO the first he saith, That the Lord Brudenel was Bailed by the Court of the Kings-Bench in open Court, and afterwards by the Court discharged; with this, That William Bedlow did importune the Lord Westmoreland to 
See the Rules of Court.  get the said Lord Brudenel discharged, for that he had nothing to say against him, as he said to the Lord Westmoreland.  
II. To the second he saith, That as to his omitting or misrepeating the Evidence at Sir George Wakeman's Trial, it is a Reflection upon the whole Court, to suppose it true, and that they should let it pass. But he saith, That Mr. Oates being asked at that Trial, why he did not charge Sir George Wakeman at the Council-Table with a Letter under his own hand concerning the Death of the King? he answered, He did not know but that he did: To which it was replied, It is plain he did not; for then the Council would have committed him: To which Mr. Oats replied, That that Council would commit no body for the Plot. Which might be the cause of the Misdemeanour of Frowning in the Articles mentioned.  
III To the third he saith, He doth not remember that ever he expressed much concerning their Credit before that Trial, but that there were some passage at that Trial, which gave him great cause of doubt; which he hopes he might do, without making it an Article of Misdemeanour.  
IU. & V To the fourth and fifth he saith, That the Persons in the Articles mentioned, were committed by him for publishing several libellous and scandalous Papers, which were proved against them upon Oath: Which Commitments, even of a Feme Covert also, notwithstanding Mr. Oates and Mr. Bedlow's Skill, were according to Law; though there is no Law for these persons to call me to account for Judicial Acts done upon other Men.  
VI To the sixth, which is an insolent Scandal, he referreth himself to the Testimony of that Gentleman of Quality, whoever he be.  
VII. To the seventh he saith, That the persons in this Article were bailed and discharged by the Court, where the Attorney General was first called; but indeed Mr. Oates and Mr. Bedlow's Consent was not asked.  
VIII. To the eighth, he saith, He conceives himself not obliged to do all the business that Justices of the Peace may do; and though without an offence he might have given such an answer as is mentioned, yet he did not, but a servant of his did.  
IX. To the ninth he saith, That when the cause was tried, he told the Jury the matter was plain, and so did the rest of the Court; upon which he went away, without any Compilment to Mr. Oates, to try Causes in London.  
X. To the tenth he saith, that Osborne made only two Affidavits before him, the substance of one was, That one Bowring a servant to Mr. Oates had said, that he had heard Mr. Oats say, That the Kingdom of England would never flourish, until it became Elective, and the Kings chosen by the People. The other Affidavit was, when he was sent to him by an Order of Council to be Examined, wherein amongst other things he Swears, That though at the Trial of Knox and Lane, it was asked where Osborne was, and Mr. Oates his Counsel answered that he was fled, yet Osborne swears, that he at that time was at his Father's House in the Country, and that Mr. Oates knew it; That he took his leave of him the day before he went, and told whether he went, and saw a Letter wrote by Mr. Oates to his Father to send for him; notwithstanding it was carried at the Trial as if he had been fled no man knew whither; so that the Affidavit which the Article chargeth me for permitting to be made, was not Sworn before me.  
XI. He saith, it is more to be wondered how Mr. Oates should dare to Charge that as an Article of Misdemeanour, which was said in the King's presence, and yet repeated false too.  
XII. That at Monmouth Assizes he did tell Mr. Bedlow, that he was more unsatisfied about Mr. Langhorns Trial than all the Rest; and the rather, for that he was credibly informed since the Trial, that Mr. Langhorns Study was so situated, that he that walked in his Chamber could not see Mr. Langhorne write in his Study: which was Mr. Bedlow's Evidence.  
XIII. He saith, the matter complained of is a mere Contract with other Men, of which he thinks himself not bound to give Mr. Oates and Mr. Bedlow any other Account, but that by the taking of Twenty Guinies he lost forty; and that his backwardness to go into Court to Wakeman's Trial, makes it look as if he had not had Ten thousand pound to favour Wakeman in this Trial.  
If these ARTICLES shall appear to Your Majesty to be frivolous, or scandalous, or not true; I humbly pray Your Majesty's just Resentment thereon, in Honour to Your Courts and Government. And that such an unknown Attempt may not go unpunished, That the Promoters may be left to be proceeded against according to Law.  
FINIS.   

THe Articles of Dr. Titus' Oats and Mr. William Bedlow against the Lord Chief Justice Scroggs were heard this 21th of January, 1679. before the King and Council; and upon the hearing of both sides, Dr. Oates and Captain Bedlow are left to be proceeded against according to Law.