THE TRIAL, AND Condemnation OF Capt. Thomas Uaughan. FOR High Treason, In Adhering to the FRENCH-KING, And for Endeavouring the Destruction of His Majesty's Ships in the NORTH.  
Who upon full Evidence was found Guilty at the Sessions-House in the Old-Baily, on the 6 th'. of Novemb. 1696.  
With all the Learned Arguments of the King's and Prisoner's Council, both of the Civil and Common Law, upon the New Act of Parliament for Regulating Trials in Cases of High Treason.  
Perused by Sir Charles Hedges, Judge of the High Court of Admiralty; the Lord Chief Justice Holt, the Lord Chief Justice Treby, and the Council Present at the TRIAL.  
To which is Added, Captain Vaughan's Commission. at Large, which he had from the French-King.  
As also an Account of the TRIAL of John Murphey for HIGH TREASON.  
LONDON, Printed for John Everingham at the Star near the West-end of St. Paul's. 1697.   

Die Sabbati, tricesimo primo Octobris, Annoque Regni Regis Willielmi Octavo, Annoque Domini. 1696.  The Court being sat, at which were present, Sir Charles Hedges, Judge of the High Court of Admiralty, the Lord Chief Justice Holt, the Lord Chief Justice Treby, the Lord Chief Baron Ward, Mr. Justice Turton, and others of his Majesty's Commissioners. The Court proceeded on this manner. Cl. of Arr. 
MAKE Proclamation.  Cryer. 
O Yes, O yes, O yes. All manner of Persons that have any thing more to do, etc. and were Adjourned to this Hour, draw near, and give your Attendance. God save the King.  
Then the Grand Jury were called over, and the Appearances marked. And Witnesses being Sworn in Court to give Evidence to them, against Thomas Vaughan, they withdrew to hear the fame.  
Then the Keeper of Newgate was ordered to bring his Prisoner Thomas Vaughan to the Bar. Which he did.  Cl. of Arr. 
Tho. Vaughan, hold up thy Hand. (Which he did.) Thou standest Indicted, etc.  
How sayest thou, Tho. Vaughan, Art thou Guilty of the High Treason whereof thou standest Indicted, or Not Guilty?  T. Vaughan. 
Not Guilty.  Cl. of Arr. 
Culprit, How wilt thou be Tried?  T. Vaughan. 
By God, and this Country.  Cl. of Arr. 
God send thee a good Deliverance.  
And then the Court proceeded to the Trial of the Pirates, and gave notice to Mr. Vaughan to prepare for his Trial on Friday next, the 6th of November, 1696.   

Die Veneris, sexto Novembris, Annoque Regni Regis Willielmi Octavo, Annoque Domini, 1696.  Cl. of Arr. 
CRYER, make Proclamation.  Cryer. 
O yes, O yes, O yes. All manner of Persons that have any thing more to do at this Sessions of Oyer and Terminer, Adjourned over to this Day, draw near and give your Attendance. And you Sheriffs of the City of London, return the Precepts to you directed, upon Pain and Peril which will fall thereupon.  
Then the Under Sheriff returned the Precepts.  Cl. of Arr. 
Make Proclamation.  Cryer. 
O yes. You good Men of the City of London, Summoned to appear here this Day, to try between our Sovereign Lord the King, and the Prisoner at the Bar, Answer to your Names, as you shall be called, every one at the first Call, and save your Issues.  
The whole Panel was called over, and the Appearances of those that answered, Recorded, and the Defaulters were again called over.  Mr. Phipps. 
Will your Lordship please to order, that two Men may be brought from the Marshalsea, in behalf of the Prisoner?  L. C. J. Holt. 
You shall have an Order.  
Then the Court went on the Trial of the Six Pirates, and after the Trial was over, Tho. Vaughan was called to the Barr.  T. Vaughan. 
My Lord, my Irons are very uneasy to me, I desire they may be taken off.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Ay, ay, take them off.  Mr. Phipps. 
If your Lordship please, we have some doubts as to the Indictment.  L. C. J. Holt. 
If you have any Exceptions, you ought to have made them before the Prisoner pleaded to it.  Mr. Phipps. 
I thought you had allowed it, my Lord, in former Cases.  L. C. J. Holt. 
No, we did not allow it as of Right due to the Prisoner; the Exceptions should have been made before the Plea. You were indulged in being heard at first in the Cases of Rookwood, Cranburne, and Lowick, but it was not the intent of the Act, to alter the Method of the Proceeding; and so upon consideration hath it been determined. The Prisoner hath time given by the Act to make any exception to the Indictment before he pleaded, but you may move what you will afterwards in Arrest of Judgement, if it be material.  Cl. of Arr. 
Thomas Vaughan, Those Men that you shall hear called, and Personally appear, are to pass between our Sovereign Lord the King and you, upon Trial of your Life and Death; if therefore you will Challenge them, or any of them, your time is to speak unto them as they come to the Book to be Sworn, before they be Sworn.  Mr. Phipps. 
There was one Man here that desired to be excused, because he was on the Grand Jury; therefore it seems there are some returned upon this Jury that were on the Grand Jury, which I think ought not to be.  L. C. I Holt. 
Challenge them then.  Mr. Phipps. 
We do not know the Men.  
Then the Panel was called over, and a great many Challenges made, and the Twelve Men that were Sworn, were these.  

Fd. Leeds.  
Caleb Hook.  
Nath. Green.  
Joceline Roberts.  
Hen. Sherbrook.  
Tho. Parker.  
Jo. Sherbrook.  
Peter Grace.  
Tho. Emms.  
Roger Poston.  
Peter Parker.  
— Woolley.   Cl. of Arr. 
Cryer, make Proclamation.  Cryer. 
O Yes, If any one can inform my Lords, the King's Justices, the King's Sergeant, the King's Attorney General, the King's Advocate, in his High Court of Admiralty, before this Inquest be taken of the High Treason, whereof Thomas Vaughan, the Prisoner at the Bar, stands Indicted, let them come forth, and they shall be heard, for now the Prisoner at the Bar stands upon his Deliverance; and all others that are bound by Recognizance to give Evidence against the Prisoner at the Bar, let them come forth and give their Evidence, or else they forfeit their Recognizance.  Cl. of Arr. 
Tho. Vaughan, hold up thy Hand. (Which he did.) You that are Sworn, look upon the Prisoner, and hearken to his Cause. He stands Indicted by the Name of Thomas Vaughan.  
Whereas, That before and until the 8th. day of July in the 7th. Year of the Reign of our Sovereign Lord King William the Third, there was open War between our said Lord the King, and Lewis the French King. And that the said War continued on the said 8th Day of July, in the 7th. Year aforesaid, and doth still continue. And that for all the time aforesaid, the said Lewisthe French King and his Subjects, were, and at present are Enemies of our said Lord the King that now is: And that at the time of the said War, and before the said 8th day of July in the 7th Year aforesaid, the said Lewis the French King, set out, amongst others, a certain small Ship of Warr called the Loyal Clencarty, of which Thomas Vaughan, a Subject of our said Lord the King that now is, was Commander, with several French Subjects, Enemies of our said Lord the King, to the Number of 15 Persons, in a Warlike manner to take and destroy the Ships, Goods, and Moneys of our said Lord the King, and his Subjects, and against our said Lord the King to wage War upon the High-Seas, within the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England. And that at the time of the said War between our said Lord the King and the aforesaid Lewis the French King, Tho. Vaughan, late of Galloway, in the Kingdom of Ireland, Marriner, being a Subject of our said now Lord the King, as a false Rebel against the said King, his Supreme Lord, and not having the fear of God before his Eyes, nor considering the Duty of his Allegiance, but being moved and seduced by the instigation of the Devil, and altogether withdrawing the cordial Love, and true and due Obedience which every true and faithful Subject of our said Lord the King, ought, by Law, to have towards the said King; and the said War, as much as in him lay, against our said Lord the King, designing and intending to prosecute and assist. The said Tho. Vaughan on the said 8th day of July in the said 7th Year of the King, being a Soldier aboard the said Ship of Warr called the Loyal Clencarty, in the Service of the said Lewis the French King, And being then on the High-Seas, within the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England, about Fourteen Leagues from Deal, did then and there by force and Arms, falsely, maliciously, wickedly, and Traitorously, aid, help, and assist the Enemies of our said Lord the King, in the Ship of War called the Loyal Clencarty. And afterwards the said Thomas Vaughan, in the Execution and Performance of his said aiding helping and assisting, Maliciously Falsely and Traitorously sailed a Cruising to several Maratime Places within the Jurisdiction aforesaid, by Force and Arms to take the Ships, Goods, and Money of our said Lord the King, and his Subjects, against the Duty of his Allegiance, the Peace of our said Lord the King, and also against a Statute in that Case made and Provided.  
And the said Jurors for our said Lord the King, upon their said Oaths, farther represent, That the aforesaid Thomas Vaughan, as a false Traitor against our said Lord the King, further desinging practising, and with his whole strength, intending the common Peace and Tranquillity of this Kingdom of England to disturb. And War and Rebellion against the said King upon the High-Seas within the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England, to move, stir up, and procure. And the said Lord the King, from the Title, Honour, Royal Name, and Imperial Crown of his Kingdom of England, and Dominions upon the High-Seas, to depose and deprive, and miserable slaughter of the Subjects of the said Lord the King, of this Kingdom of England, upon the High-Seas, and within the Jurisdiction aforesaid, to cause and procure, on the said 8th day of July, in the said 7th Year of the King, upon the High-Seas, about Fourteen Leagues from Deal, and within the Dominion of the Crown of England, and within the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England aforesaid, falsely, maliciously, devilishly, and treacherously by force and Arms, with divers others false Rebels and Traitors, (to the Jurors unknown) War against our said now Lord the King, prepared, promoted, levied, and waged. And that the said Thomas Vaughan in performance of his said War and Rebellion, then and there by Force and Arms, maliciously, wickedly, and openly assembled and joined himself with several other false Traitors and Rebels (to the Jurors unknown) to the Number of Fifteen Persons, being Armed and Provided in a Warlike manner, with Guns and other Arms, as well offensive as defensive. And the said Thomas Vaughan, then and there being aboard the said Ship of War, called the Loyal Clencarty, assembled with the other false Rebels and Traitors as aforesaid, maliciously, wickedly and Traitorously sailed a Cruising to several Maritime places, with the aforesaid Ship of War, called the Loyal Clencarty, with an intent to take. spoil, and carry away the Ships, Goods, and Money, of our said Lord the King, and his Subjects, by Force and Arms, upon the High and open Seas, within the jurisdiction aforesaid, against the Duty of his Allegiance, the Peace of our said Lord the King, his Crown and Dignities; and likewise against the Form of a Statute in this Case made and provided.  

Thomas Noden,  
Samuel Oldham, Jurors.   
Upon this Indictment he hath been Arraigned, and upon his Arraignment he hath pleaded Not Guilty, and for his Trial he hath put himself upon God and his Country, which Country you are. Your Charge is to inquire whether he be guilty of the High Treason whereof he stands Indicted, or not Guilty. If you find him Guilty, you are to inquire what Goods or Chattels, Lands or Tenements he had at the time of the High Treason committed, or at any time since. If you find him not Guilty, you are to inquire whether he fled for it. If you find that he fled for it, you are to inquire of his Goods and Chattels as if you had found him Guilty. If you find him not Guilty, nor that he did fly for it, you are to say so, and no more, and hear your Evidence.  Mr. Whitaker. 
May it please you, my Lord, and you Gentlemen of the Jury, The Prisoner at the Bar, Thomas Vaughan, stands Indicted for High Treason, That whereas on the 9 th' of July, there was a War between his Majesty the King of England, and Lewis the French King; amongst other Warlike Preparations, that the French King did make, he did set forth a Ship called the Loyal Clencarty; That the Prisoner at the Bar, as a false Traitor, did list himself aboard this Ship; And on the High-Seas, about Eleven Leagues from Deal, did Traitorously aid the King's Enemies, to take the King's Ships. This is said to be against the Duty of his Allegiance, and the Peace of our Sovereign Lord the King, his Crown and Dignity. He stands further Indicted, for that he, the said Thomas Vaughan, with several other false Traitors, did levy War, and Arm themselves with Arms, Offensive and Defensive, and was Cruising on the High-Seas, off of Deal, with an intent to take the King's Ships, and to kill and destroy the King's Subjects, against the Duty of his Allegiance, and the Peace of our Sovereign Lord the King, his Crown and Dignity. To this Indictment he has pleaded not Guilty. We shall call our Witnesses, and prove the Fact, and doubt not but you will do your Duty.  Dr. Littleton. 
Gentlemen, of the Jury, you have heard the Indictment opened, and also what sort of Crime the Prisoner at the Bar stands charged with, viz. That he being a Subject of the Crown of England, has, together with his Accomplices, armed himself in a Military way, to Murder and Destroy his fellow-Subjects, and as much as in him lay, to Ruin his Native Country, by ruining the Trade and Traffic, which is the great support and Riches of the Nation. And that his Crime might be Consummate, He, with his Accomplices, has done what in him lay, to Dethrone, and dispossess his Sacred Majesty, as well knowing it was in vain to expect to make the Nation unhappy, as long as we enjoy so Great and Good a Prince. So that you are to look on the Prisoner as an Enemy and Traitor to his own Country; and not only so, but as one of the worst and most dangerous Enemies: Since he being a Subject of these Islands, was the better able to spy out our Weaknesses and Defects, and thereby to do us the greater Mischief. It is not to be expressed, what Ruin and Desolation it would have caused to this Nation, had this Man and his Accomplices brought their wicked Intentions to effect; and all this was done to Aid and Assist the Grand Enemy of Christendom; and of our own Country in particular, the French King. Therefore as you are lovers of your King and Country, and your Fellow-Subjects, whom the Prisoner and his Accomplices would have destroyed; I am sure you will take care to do the Nation Justice, and that he be brought to condign punishment. Gentlemen, there is one thing further that I must not omit, viz. That the Prisoner at the Bar being in Custody for these very Crimes about a Twelvemonth since, did not think fit to trust to his Innocency, nor to his pretended French Extraction, but the day before he was to be Tried, he thought fit to break Prison, withdraw from Justice, and run his Country: Which tho' not a Confession and full Proof, yet is a great Evidence of his Gild.  Mr. Sol. Gen. 
May it please your Lordship, and you Gentlemen of the Jury, the Prisoner at the Bar, Thomas Vaughan, stands Indicted for two sorts of Treason. The one is for Levying War against the King, the other is for Aiding and Abetting the King's Enemies. And to prove the first, the levying of War, we shall prove that he was a Captain of a French Ship, called the Granado of St. Maloes', and that with that Ship, he took and carried away many of his Majesty's Subjects, and took several Merchant Ships, and carried them to France. We shall likewise prove that he was Captain of another French Ship, called the Loyal Clancarty, with which he was Cruising off Deal, where we had several Ships lying at the same time: And there he being on Board the said Ship Clancarty, was taken Prisoner, with a Commission, by which he was Constituted Captain of the Loyal Clancarty, under the Hand of Lewis the French King.  
And to prove him aiding and abetting to the King's Enemies, we shall prove against him this particular Fact; that he and his Accomplices did in the Year 1692. come to London, and went to Tower-Wharf, to inquire what Vessels were ready to go down the River; and there was one laden with Piece-Goods, and he put himself, and several other of his Accomplices into this Vessel, to go down the River; but they had contrived the matter, and brought it so to pass, that they fell on those Men who had the government of the Ship, and carried away this Vessel to France. Now if this be true, the Prisoner is certainly guilty of aiding the King's Enemies: And to prove he was guilty of this, we will prove to you, that even in France, where he was at perfect Liberty, he owned he was the Contriver of all this, and that he had a thousand pound for his share of what was taken from our Merchants. If we prove these two Facts against him, I doubt not but you will find him guilty. We will call our Witnesses.  CI. of Ar. T. Eglington, Rich. Crouch, Sam. Oldham, John Bub, Noden. 
(Who appeared, and were Sworn.)  T. Vaughan. 
With submission to your Lordships, and the Honourable Bench, I beg that they may be put asunder, out of hearing of one another.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Let it be so, though you cannot insist upon it as your Right, but only a Favour that we may grant.  Mr. Cowper. 
Set up Richard Crouch. Is your Name Richard Crouch?  R. Crouch. 
Yes, Sir.  Mr. Cowper. 
Give my Lord and the Jury an account of what you know of the Ship Coventry taking of the Clancarty, and what you know concerning the Prisoner at the Bar in the taking of her.  R. Crouch. 
We weighed our Anchor about four a Clock.  Mr. Cowper. 
Where were you?  R. Crouch. 
At the North.  Mr. Cowper. 
In what Ship?  R. Crouch. 
The Coventry. After we had been under Sail a matter of an hour, we came to an Anchor with a little wind; so, Sir, this Thomas Vaughan met with a couple of Pinks, they were small Vessels that he designed to take; but he saw us and so lay by all Night.  Mr. Cowper. 
Who lay by?  R. Crouch. 
Thomas Vaughan, the Prisoner at the Bar.  Mr. Cowper. 
In what Vessel was he?  R. Crouch. 
In a two-and-twenty-Oar-Barge, he lay by at the Gunfleet; the next Morning we weighed Anchor, at daylight; we saw him, and chased after him; and we made them, and he made us, and we made what haste we could, and coming up we fired a Gun at him, and then we fired another, and then he went ashore.  Mr. Cowper. 
What, do you mean that he run his Vessel on the Sands?  R. Crouch. 
Yes, and then we fired another Gun at him, and then he got off again; and then we fired another Gun, and could not bring him to, and then he got off the Sands again; and when we came up to him, we Manned our Longboat, and Pinnace and Barge, and had him at last. When he came on Board, he said I cannot deny but I am an Irishman, and that my Design was to burn the Ships at the North.  Mr. Cowper. 
Did he himself confess it?  R. Crouch. 
Yes he did, that is the Man, I know him well enough.  L. C. J. Holt. 
You took him, in what Ship was you?  R. Crouch. 
In the Coventry.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Out of what Ship was he taken?  R. Crouch. 
The two-and-twenty-Oar-Barge.  L. C. J. Holt. 
What Ship did it belong to?  R. Crouch. 
I reckon it was my Lord Barclay's Barge.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Who did it belong to then?  R. Crouch. 
To the King of France.  L. C. J. Holt. 
What Company was there in her, how many Men had she aboard?  R. Crouch. 
About five and twenty hands.  Mr. Cowper. 
Did you ever hear him say any thing of a Commission he had?  R. Crouch. 
I heard he had a French Commission, but I did not see it.  Mr. Cowper. 
Did you hear him say any thing of it?  R. Crouch. 
No.  Mr. Cowper. 
But he told you his Design was to burn the Ships at the North?  R. Crouch. 
Yes.  Mr. Cowper. 
What Ships?  R. Crouch. 
The English Ships; there were several Ships there then.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Were there no Frenchmen aboard the Barge?  R. Crouch. 
No, that I can tell.  Mr. Lechmere. 
From whence did he come, from England, or France?  R. Crouch. 
From Calais in France.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Prithee hear me, this two-and-twenty-Oar-Barge, did it belong to any other Ship?  R. Crouch. 
No, not that I can tell.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Did he call that Vessel the Loyal Clancarty?  R. Crouch. 
Yes, my Lord.  
Then Edmund Courtney was called.  Mr. Sol. Gen. Mr. Courtney, 
pray tell my Lord and the Jury what you know of the going away of a Customhouse Boat?  Ed. Courtney. 
I will tell you, if you please.  Mr. Phipps. 
My Lord, I think they ought not to examine to that, because it is not laid in the Indictment. The carrying away of the Customhouse Barge is not mentioned in the Indictment, and by the New Act for Regulating Trials in Cases of Treason, no Evidence is to be admitted or given of any Overt-Act, that is not expressly laid in the Indictment.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Nothing else? Suppose a Man be Indicted for Levying War against the King, or Adhering to the King's Enemies, can't they prove any Act that makes out a Levying of War, or an Adherence to the King's Enemy?  Mr. Phipps. 
With submission, not by that Act, my Lord, unless it be laid in the Indictment.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Levying of War is the Treason; may they not prove that Levying of War, without being confined to any special or particular Act?  Mr. Phipps. 
With submission, by the 25 of Edw. the 3 d. Levying of War, as well as Imagining the Death of the King, must have the Overt Acts, that are to prove it, expressed in the Indictment.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Levying of War is an Overt-Act.  Mr. Sol. Gen. 
The business of Overtacts is, where the Compassing and Imagining the King's Death is the Crime and Question, and this must be discovered by Overtacts. But if the Treason be falsifying of the King's Money, this is Treason, but there can be no Overt-Act of that, for that is an Overt-Act itself; but there must be an Overt-Act to prove the Compassing and Imagining the Death of the King, and in no other sort of Treason.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Levying of War that is an Overt-Act, so is Adhering to the King's Enemies. Now Compassing and Imagining the Death of the King is not an Overt-Act in itself, but is a secret imagination in the Mind, and a purpose in the Heart; but there must be external Acts to discover that imagination and purpose.  Mr. Phipps. 
What is the meaning of the New Act then, that there shall be no Evidence of any Overt-Act, but what is laid in the Indictment?  L. C. J. Holt. 
What Overtacts are there in Clipping and Coining?  Mr. Phipps. 
That is not within the New Act of Parliament.  L. C. J. Holt. 
That is most true, the one is excepted, the other is not comprehended; but the Question is upon the Statute of 25. Edw. 3 d. to which the late Act doth refer. Now proving the adherence to the King's Enemy, is proving an Overt-Act. Suppose it be the kill of the Chancellor, or Treasurer, or Judge in the Execution of his Office, what Overtacts will you have then? Adhering to the King's Enemies, is a Treason that consists in doing an Overt-Act.  Mr. Phipps. 
Yes, my Lord, I take it that it is for the New Act, by saying that no Evidence shall be admitted of any Overt-Act, that is not expressly laid in the Indictment, must be intended of such Treasons, of which by Law Overtacts ought to be laid. Now the killing the Chancellor, or Treasurer, or Judge in the Execution of his Office, are not such Treasons of which it was necessary to lay any Overtacts in the Indictment, and so not within the meaning of this New Law. But Levying War, and Adhering to the King's Enemies, which are the Treasons in this Indictment must by the express purview of the 25 th' of Edw. 3. be proved by Overtacts, which are to be alleged in the Indictment.  Mr. Sol. Gen. 
The New Act does not alter the Law in this particular, what was Law before, is Law now, it leaves the Overtacts as they were before; and it says not that an Overt-Act need to be expressed, where it was not needful before. Now if a Man be Indicted for Compassing the Death of a private Person, there ought to be some Overt-Act to prove his Design; but if there be an Indictment for Murder, there needs no other Overt-Act to prove it, but the Murder itself.  L. C. J. Holt. 
But the force of the Objection lies in this, viz. To say a Man Levied War, or Adhered to the King's Enemies, is no good Indictment; but it is necessary to allege in what manner he Levied War, or Adhered to the King's Enemies; as that he appeared in such a warlike manner, or did adhere to and assist the King's Enemies, by joining Forces with them, or otherwise assisting them, or Confederating with them, that must be specified. But if you Indict a Man generally for adhering to the King's Enemies, and not say how and in what manner he did adhere to them, that is not a good Indictment; therefore if you particularise what Enemies, and how and in what manner he adhered to them, no Evidence can be given of any other kind of adherence, but that which is so specified in the Indictment.  Mr. Sol. Gen. 
Then we must put all our Evidence into the Indictment.  Mr. Phipps. 
So you must, as to the Overtacts.  Mr. Sol. Gen. 
That will be the same thing as to put in all our Evidence, if we must give Evidence of no Overt-Act but what is expressed in the Indictment. But I do not take it, that the Act requires all Overtacts to be put in the Indictment.  Mr. Phipps. 
The Act says so. Suppose you had left out the Overt-Act, would the Indictment have been good?  Mr. Sol. Gen. 
We did not intend to put in all the Over-Acts, but only what related to that part of the Treason.  Mr. Phipps. 
The Treason must be proved by Overtacts, and the Overtacts that prove the Treason, must be mentioned in the Indictment.  Mr. Sol. Gen. 
What the Overtacts of the Treason's beforementioned, as Counterfeiting the King's Money, and the like, are all to be mentioned?  L. C. J. Holt. 
Consider, if you can make that a good Indictment, to say, that the Prisoner adhered to the King's Enemies, without mentioning any Overtacts to manifest such an adherence, than your Answer to Mr. Phipps is full; but if it be not a good Indictment, without alleging particular Acts of adherence, than it necessarily follows, that if Particulars are alleged, and you do not prove them as is alleged, you have failed in the Indictment, and so his Objection will lie hard upon you.  Mr. Sol. Gen. 
My Lord, we framed our Indictment according to the Letter of the Statute.  L. C. J. Holt. 
In compassing the death of the King, you must show how that is manifested by the Overtacts.  Mr. Sol. Gen. 
But compassing and imagining must be discovered by some Overtacts.  L. C. J. Treby. 
This is a doubt I have often thought of, I thought it most natural that the Word Overt-act should relate to the first Article, viz. compassing and imagining of the King's Death: For Overt-act seems to be opposed to something of a contrary Nature: Act is opposed properly to Thought, Overt is properly opposed to secret. And that sort of Treason consisting in secret Thought and internal Purpose, cannot be known, tried, and judged of, without being Disclosed and manifested by some external open act. Wherhfore it is pertinent and Reasonable, in order to Attaint a Man of such Treason, that the Indictment should Charge and set forth the Act, as well as the Thought. And so it hath been used to be done.  
But, such Order or manner doth not seem so natural or necessary, in framing Indictments for other Treasons, where the Treason consists in visible or discernible Facts; as levying War, etc.  
Nevertheless I think an Overt-Act ought to be alleged in an Indictment of Treason for adhering to the King's Enemies, giving them. Aid and Comfort. And the Overt-Act, or Acts, in this Case, aught to be the particular actions, means, or manner by which the Aid and Comfort was given.  
My Lord Cook declares his Opinion to this purpose. His words which I read out of his Book here) are these. The Composition and Connection of the words are to be observed, viz. [thereof be Attainted by Overt Deed] This, says he, Relates to the several and distinct Treasons, before expressed, and especially to the compass and imagination of the Death of the King, etc. for that it is secret in the heart, etc. Now the Articles of Treason, before expressed in the Statute of 25. E. 3. are four. 1. Compassing, etc. 2. Violating the Queen, etc. 3. Levying War, and 4. This of Adhering, etc. (And yet it is hardly possible to set forth any Overt Act concerning the 2 d. otherwise than in the words of the Statute: That Article expressing so particular a Fact.)  
I do observe also, that these words [Being thereof Attainted by Overt Fact] do, in this Statute, immediately follow this Article of Adhering, etc. And it would be a great Violence to Construe them to refer to the first Article only, and not to this last, to which they are thus connected. If they are to be Restrained to a single Article, it were more agreeable to the strict Rules of Construing, to refer them to this of Adhering only.  L. C. J. Holt. 
That which I insist on is this, whether the Indictment would be good, without expressing the special Overt-Act. If it be, than this is a surplusage, and we are not confined to it; but if it be not a good Indictment without expressing it, than we are confined to it.  Mr. Phipps. 
I believe Mr. Solicitor never saw an Indictment, of this kind, without an Overt-Act laid in it.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Can you prove the Facts laid in the Indictment? for certainly the Indictment without mentioning particular Acts of adherance, would not be good.  Mr. Cowper. 
Yes, my Lord; and as to the Evidence before you, we would only offer this; whether in this Case, if the Indictment were laid generally, for adhering to the King's Enemies in one place, and in another place levying of War, and nothing more particular, it would be good; I doubt it would not. But when there is laid a particular Act of Adhering, we may give in Evidence matter to strengthen the direct proof of that particular Act of Adhering to the King's Enemies, tho' that matter be not specially laid in the Indictment: For the Act goes only to this, That the Prisoner shall not be Convicted, unless you prove against him the Over-Acts specially laid in the Indictment; But whether it shall not be heard, to make the other Overt-Act which is laid, the more probable. Now we have laid a special Overt-Act in the Indictment; and we have produced Evidence of it, and we would produce likewise collateral Evidence, to induce a firmer Belief of that special Overt-Act, by showing you that he hath made it his practice, during the War, to aid and assist the King's Enemies; But if the Jury do not find him Guilty of the special Overtacts laid in the Indictment, they cannot find him Guilty by the proof of any other Overt-Act not laid in the Indictment. But if we prove he has made this his practice, in other instances, during the War, whether that proof shall not be received?  Mr. Phipps. 
My Lord, I desire the Act may be read. It expressly contradicts what Mr. Cowper says, for it says, That no Evidence shall be given of any Overt-Act, that is not expressly laid in the Indictment. (The Act was Read.)  L. C. J. Holt. 
That is, you may give Evidence of an Overt-Act, that is not in the Indictment, if it conduce to prove one that is in it. As consulting to kill the King, or raise a Rebellion, is laid in the Indictment, you may give in Evidence an acting in pursuance of a Consult, that is an Evidence that they agreed to do it, tho' that doing of the thing is, of itself, another Overt-Act, but it tends to prove the Act laid in the Indictment.  Mr. Phipps. 
The Overt-Act laid in this Indictment, is his Cruising in the Clancarty; and this Overt-Act you would prove, is no Evidence of that, nor relates to it, but it is a distinct Overt-Act of itself.  L. C. J. Holt. 
You cannot give Evidence of a distinct Act, that has no relation to the Overt-Act mentioned in the Indictment, tho' it should conduce to prove the same species of Treason.  Mr. Cowper. 
We would apply this proof to the Overt-Act laid in the Indictment.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Any thing that has a direct tendency to it, you may prove.  Mr. Cowper. 
We have laid the Overt-Act, that he did voluntarily put himself on Board this Vessel of the French King, the Loyal Clancarty, and did go to Sea in her, and Cruise, with a design to take the Ships of the King of England, and his Subjects. Now part of the Overt-Act, is his Intention in the Act of Cruising, we do not charge him with taking one Ship, so that his Intention is a Member of the Overt-Act, and it must be proved, to make his Cruising Criminal, that he designed to take the Ships of the King of England. Now we think it a proper proof of his Intention, to show, that during this War, before and after the time of the Treason laid in the Indictment, he was a Cruiser upon, and Taker of the King's Ships, and this fortifies the direct proof given of his Intention.  L. C. J. Holt. 
I cannot agree to that, because you go not about to prove what he did in the Vessel called the Loyal Clancarty; but that he had an intention to commit depredation on the King's Subjects: So he might, but in another Ship. Now, because a Man has a design to commit depredation on the King's Subjects in one Ship, does that prove he had an intention to do it in another?  Mr. Phipps. 
He was Cruising in the Clancarty, that is the Overt-Act laid in the Indictment; and the Overt-Act you would produce, is his being in another Vessel.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Go on, and show what he did in the Clancarty. You the Prisoner, will you ask this Man any Questions?  Mr. Phipps. 
Crouch, you said, that the Prisoner did say he could not deny but he was an Irish man; how came you to talk about it?  R. Crouch. 
He said, I cannot deny but I am an Irish Man.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Did he say he was an Irish man? What were the words he used?  R. Crouch. 
He told the Lieutenant he was an Irish Man.  Mr. Phipps. 
What Discourse was there? How came he to say that?  R. Crouch. 
I went by only, and heard the words spoken to the Lieutenant.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Did he speak English?  R. Crouch. 
Yes, my Lord.  L. C. J. Holt. 
If he spoke English, that is some Evidence he is an English man, tho' the contrary may be proved by him.  T. Vaughan. 
That would no more prove me an Englishman, than if an English man were in France, and could speak French, would prove him a Frenchman, because he could speak French.  L. C. J. Holt. 
You shall he heard by and by to say what you will on your own behalf.  Mr. Phipps. 
Were there any French men on board the Clancarty?  R. Crouch. 
No, Sir.  Mr. Phipps. 
Mr. Vaughan, will you ask him any Questions yourself?  Mr. Cowper. 
Call T. Noden.  T. Vaughan. 
How did you know that there were no Frenchmen aboard? Did I address myself to you, when I came aboard?  R. Crouch. 
No, Sir.  T. Vaugan. 
Did I not address myself to the Captain when I came aboard? How came I to tell you I was an Irishman?  R. Crouch. 
They were all Scotchmen, Englishmen, and Irish men.  Mr. Phipps. 
Mr. Vaughan, you need not take up the time of the Court about that matter. Mr. Cowper, you may go on.  Mr. Sol. Gen. 
Did the Prisoner own that he acted by the Fr King's Commission? Did you know any thing of his having a French Commission?  R. Crouch. 
Yes, I heard he had one, but I did not see it, but I heard so by the Company.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Were there any Frenchmen a-board?  R. Crouch. 
No, not that I know of. They were Dutchmen, and English-Men, and Scotchmen, and Irish Men.  Mr. Cowper. 
Call T. Noden (Who appeared and was Sworn.) Do you give my Lord and the Jury an Account of taking the Vessel, called the Two-and-Twenty-Oar-Barge.  T. Noden. 
Last Year, about June or July, to the best of my Remembrance, I belonged to his Majesty's Ship the Coventry, and we took the Two-and-Twenty-Oar-Barge.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How many Dutch men were aboard?  T. Noden. 
I do not know of above one.  L. C. J. Treby. 
What were the rest? Were there any Frenchmen?  T. Noden. 
Yes, there were several Frenchmen aboard. I belonged to the Coventry. And as we were sailing by the North, and the Gunfleet, our Captain spied a small Vessel sailing by the Sands, and he supposed her to be a French Privateer, and he fired a Gun to make them bring to, and they did not obey; and at last fired a Gun, Shot and all, and they would not come to. Then the Captain ordered to Man the Boat, and row after them: So the Barge, and Pinnace, and Longboat were Manned; and they came pretty near them. This Barge we took, was aground also, and they got her afloat, and she run aground again: And as they were aground, most of them out of the Boat, our Longboat struck aground; and waded after them near half a League, and when we came to the Barge, there was this Captain Vaughan, and two or three and Twenty more. And there was two Dutchmen, and, as I apprehended, some Frenchmen; there was in her a Blunderbuss, and small Arms, and a considerable quantity of Hand-Granadoes.  L. C. J. Holt. 
What Vessel was you aboard?  T. Noden. 
The Coventry.  Mr. Sol. Gen. 
What Countryman did Captain Vaughan say he was?  T. Noden. 
I did not hear any thing of it. Our Captain Examined the Dutchman what Countryman the Commander was, and he said he was an Irishman; but I did not hear it myself. When Captain Vaughan was brought aboard the Coventry, I was put aboard the Prize we had taken.  Mr. Cowper. 
Had you any discourse with Captain Vaughan.  T. Noden. 
No.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Did they endeavour to take your Ship?  T. Noden. 
No, but endeavoured to get away from us.  L. C. J. Holt. 
What Guns or Ammunition had they?  T. Noden. 
I cannot tell particularly, there was some Canvas Baggs, every Man had a Carteridge-bag, and there were some Hand-Granadoes.  Mr. Whitaker. 
What Fire-Arms had they?  T. Noden. 
I cannot say how many, but they had Muskets and Pistols, and two Blunderbusses.  Mr. Cowp. 
Did you understand whence this Ship the L. Clancarty came?  T. Noden. 
The Dutchman said they came from Calis. As near as I can guests, we spied them about Eleven a Clock, and we weighed Anchor in the Afternoon, on Sabbath-day, and they took us to be a Light Collier, and endeavoured to board us, as the Dutchman said; but when they knew what we were, they endeavoured to escape from us.  Mr. Cowp. 
Call Sam. Oldham. (Who appeared, and was Sworn.) Mr. Oldham, was you aboard the Coventry, when she took the Ship called the Clancarty?  Sam. Oldham. 
Yes, I was.  Mr. Cowper. 
Pray give an Account what you observed of the Prisoner T. Vaughan then?  Sam. Oldham. 
We weighed our Anchor first at the Boy and Nore, so we saw a Prize in the Morning, the Captain said it was a Prize, and we made Sail after him, and they ran on the Goodwin Sands; and the Captain seeing the Barge run aground, we fired at her to bring her to; we fired a second, and she would not come to, but ran aground again. When she was aground, by the Captain's Order, we manned our Boats, and out we went after her.  Mr. Cowper. 
Did you take her?  Sam. Oldham. 
We went and our Longboat ran aground; I was in the Longboat, and we waded, I believe, a Mile and half after her.  L. C. J. Holt. 
What Frenchmen were aboard?  Sam. Oldham. 
I cannot justly say whether there were any.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Were there any?  Sam. Oldham. 
I think one or two.  Mr. Cowper. 
Were there any Dunkirkers or Walloons aboard?  Sam. Oldham. 
There was a Dutchman, who they called a Fleming, and I discoursed him.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How many Outlandish men were there aboard? was there a dozen, or how many?  Sam. Oldham. 
I cannot say the quantity.  Mr. Cowper. 
Was there more than two or three.  Sam. Oldham. 
Yes, more than two or three.  L. C. J. Holt. 
What Foreigners?  Sam. Oldham. 
Yes. And there were two Englishmen.  Mr. Cowper. 
What did you observe of the Prisoner at the Bar, at the taking of the Ship?  Sam. Oldham. 
I did not come aboard along with the Prisoner, but with his Man, and his Man said he was an Irishman, and that he was Commander of the Boat.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
What was their design in that Ship Clancarty?  Sam. Oldham. 
I cannot tell that.  Mr. Cowper. 
Did they resist, in their being taken?  Sam. Oldham. 
I cannot tell that, I saw no Arms.  Mr. Cowper. 
You were in the Action, was there any resistance made?  Sam. Oldham. 
I saw no resistance, they offered to run, they were aground once, and got off again.  Mr. Phipps. 
You say there were Foreigners, what Countrymen did you believe those Foreigners to be?  Sam. Oldham. 
I cannot justly say, I believe Dutchmen.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How many Dutchmen were there?  Sam. Oldham. 
I cannot say.  Dr. Oldish. 
But you said there were some two or three Frenchmen, and that they spoke French; do you understand French?  Sam. Oldham. 
No Sir.  Dr. Oldish. 
Then how do you know they were Frenchmen, and spoke French.  Sam. Oldham. 
They said they were, they did not speak English, several of the Ships Company said they were French.  L. C. J. Holt. 
If they were all Dutchmen, and appear in a hostile manner against the King of England's Subjects, they are Enemies, though we are in League with Holland, and the rest of the Seven Princes.  Mr. Phipps. 
The Indictment runs, That the French King, quantum Naviculam vocat, The Loyal Clancarty; cum quam plurimis subditis. Gallicis Inimicis Dei Dom● nunc ad numerum quid 〈◊〉 Personarum replet preparavit.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Suppose it doth.  Mr. Phipps. 
It is Subditis Gallicis, my Lord.  L. C. J. Holt. 
They will be Subjects in that matter, if they act under his Commission: they are Enemies to the King of England, and they have made themselves the French King's Subjects by that Act.  Mr. Phipps. 
It appears not that they are Frenchmen, my Lord.  L. C. J. Holt. 
If Dutchmen turn Rebels to the States, and take Pay of the French King, they are under the French King's Command, and so are his Subjects. Will you make them Pirates when they act under the Commission of a Sovereign Prince? They are then Subditi to him, and so Inimices to us.  Mr. Phipps. 
It does not take away their Allegiance to their Lawful Prince. They may go to the French King, and serve him, yet that does not transfer their Allegiance from their Lawful Prince to the French King, and make them his Subjects. But however, to make them Subjects within this Indictment, they must be Gallici Subditi; so they must be Frenchmen as well as Subjects.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Acting by Virtue of a Commission from the French King, will excuse them from being Pirates, though not from being Traitors to their own State, but to all other Princes and States against whom they do any Acts of Hostility, they are Enemies; And their serving under the French Kings Commission, makes them his Subjects as to all other, but their own Prince or State. And though they be not Frenchmen, yet they are Gallici Subditi; for it's the French Subjection that makes them to be Gallici Subditi.  Mr. Phipps. 
Pray my Lord, suppose a Subject of Spain should go over to the French and Fight against England; I take it, he may be termed an Enemy of the King of England, though his Prince be in League with ours, but with submission, he cannot properly be said to be a Subject of the French King; For suppose an Indictment of Treason against a Foreigner, should say, that he being a Subject, did commit Treason; and it be proved he is not a Subject, with submission, he must be acquitted.  Mr. Cowper. 
There is a Local Allegiance while he is in the Country, or Fleets, or Armies of the French King.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Dutchmen may be Enemies, notwithstanding their State is in Amity with us, if they act as Enemies.  Mr. Cowper. 
Call R. Bub. (He was sworn.) Was you aboard the Coventry, when she took the Clancarty?  R. Bub. 
Yes Sir.  Mr. Cowper. 
Give an Account what you know of the Prisoner, Tho. Vaughan, at the taking of that Ship.  R. Bub. 
We came aboard the Coventry, and were at the North at Anchor, our Pennant was taken down to be mended. So in the Night Captain Vaughan, with his two and twenty Oar Barge, rounded us two or three times. In the Morning we weighed Anchor, and fell down in order to go to the Downs; and we came up with them, and fired at Captain Vaughan, and he would not bring to. With that our Captain ordered to have the Barge, and Pinnace, and Longboat, to be manned, to go after him. They followed him, and at last came up with him, and came up pretty near; but could not come so near with the Longboat, but were fain to wade up to the middle a Mile and a half. We hoist our Colours; in order to fight them, and bore down still upon them; and they would not Fight our Men. And we took them out, and when they came aboard, the Englishman that was a Pilot was to have his Freedom, to Pilot them up the River. He confessed to the Captain, that Captain Vaughan intended to burn the Ships in the Harbour. And the next day after the Pilot had confessed it, Captain Vaughan himself confessed it on the Deck, that he came over with that design.  Mr. Cowper. 
Who did he confess it to?  R. Bub. 
To the Boatswain and Gunner, as he was on the Deck, on the Lar-Board side, that he came on purpose to burn the Shipping in the Harbour.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Did he confess that himself?  R. Bub. 
Yes, my Lord.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Whereabout was this, at the Buoy in the North?  R. Bub. 
In the Downs, my Lord.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Where did the Ships lie, that were to be burned?  R. Bub. 
At Sheerness.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
He owned himself to be an Irishman, did he not?  R. Bub. 
Yes.  Mr. Cowper. 
And that he came from Calais?  R. Bub. 
Yes.  Mr. Cowper. 
Had you any discourse with him about a Commission?  R. Bub. 
No. But our Lieutenant and Captain had, but it was not in my hearing; I will not speak further than I heard, and what I can justify.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Will you ask him any Questions?  Mr. Phipps. 
No.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Then call Mr. Jo. Crittenden, Marshal of Dover Castle. (who was Sworn) Mr. Crittenden, Pray what did you hear the Prisoner at the Bar confess of his design in coming to England?  Mr. Crittenden. 
I did not hear him say any thing of his design.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
What did he confess?  Mr. Crittenden. 
He confessed he was an Irishman.  Mr. Whitaker. 
Upon what occasion did he confess that?  Mr. Crittenden. 
When I entered him into my Book, I asked him what Countryman he was.  Mr. Cowper. 
What are you?  Mr. Crittenden. 
I am the Marshal of Dover Castle.  Mr. Cowper. 
By what Name did he order you to enter him?  Mr. Crittenden. 
Thomas Vaughan an Irishman.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Upon what Account did you enter him?  Mr. Crittenden. 
As a Prisoner.  Mr. Cowper. 
Did he speak any thing of a Commission?  Mr. Crittenden. 
I did not hear him say any thing of that.  Mr. Phipps. 
Have you your Book here?  Mr. Crittenden. 
Yes Sir.  Dr. Oldish. 
Was he not in Drink when he said so?  Mr. Crittenden. 
I believe he was not very sober indeed.  Mr. Phipps. 
Did you ever after hear him say he was an Irishman?  Mr. Crittenden. 
The next day he denied it.  Mr. Cowper. 
When he had considered the danger of it.  Mr. Crittenden. 
The next day he was examined by some of the Justices of the Peace.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Was you by when he was examined by the Justices?  Mr. Crittenden. 
Yes.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
What did he then say?  Mr. Crittenden. 
Then he said he was of Martenico.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Set up Mr. Bullock (who was sworn.) Mr. Bullock, do you know the Prisoner at the Bar?  Mr. Bullock. 
Yes.  Mr. Sol. Gen. 
Pray what have you heard him say of his Design that he came into England for?  Mr. Bullock. 
He came to Dover about the 14 th' of July 1695. as I remember: I went with several others, who were brought by the Captain of the Coventry, and the Lieutenant, and some others: And when we came thither, he there owned himself an Irishman; but when he went the next day to be examined, he said he was of Martenico. He told me he had that Barge from the Duke of Bulloign, and came on the Coast, and was chased into the Flatts, where they took him.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Did you ever hear him say he had any Commission from the French King?  Mr. Bullock. 
I know nothing of that; it was late, and we did not examine him then; but the next day, when he came to be examined, he said he was of Martenico.  Mr. Sol. Gen. 
What did he say his design was?  Mr. Bullock. 
He said, that seeing the Boat at Bulloign, he bought it of the Duke of Bulloign; and the Duke asked him what he would do with her? and he said, he would fit her up, and go and take a Ship at Sea, that is upon our Coasts.  Mr. Phipps. 
We are in your Lordship's Judgement, whether we need give any Evidence; for we think they have not proved their Indictment: For the Indictment sets forth, That the French King fitted out the Loyal Clancarty, of which Thomas Vaughan was Commander; and that very many Frenchmen, Subjects of the French King, were put on aboard. Now the first Witness swears, there were no Frenchmen; and another swears there was one or two; another, that they were Foreigners, but does not believe they were Frenchmen: So there is no proof of that part of the Indictment; nor is there any proof that he was Captain of the Loyal Clancarty: So that none can say, it is the same Vessel mentioned in the Indictment: Nor is any Act of Hostility proved; for all the Witnesses say, that Vaughan never pretended to attack them, but run from them. So that all they depend on, to support the Indictment, is to prove that he had a design to burn the Ships at Sheerness: Which will not serve their turn; for the words of the Indictment are, ad predandum super altum mare. Now Sheerness is not super altum mare, but infra Corpre Comitatus, and then not within the Indictment.  Mr. Cowper. 
The words, Ships at Sheerness, do not imply, that the Ships lay within the Town of Sheerness, but off of Sheerness, which is altum mare.  Mr. Phipps. 
Then it is not in your Indictment; for that says at Sheerness.  Mr. Cowper. 
No, off of Sheerness.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
It is no contradiction, to say the Sea is within part of a County.  Mr. Phipps. 
The Indictment says, at Sheerness.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Off of Sheerness, is the High Sea.  Mr. Phipps. 
Sheerness is not the Buoy in the North. Then you must prove he was Captain at this time: For the Indictment says, Ad tunc fuit Capitaneus & Miles.  L. C. J. Holt. 
One Overt Act of Adhering to the King's Enemies, is, that he put himself as a Soldier on Board the Ship.  Mr. Phipps. 
You will make one part agree with another, that the French King did set out a Ship, and gave him a Commission to be Captain of her.  L. C. J. Holt. 
The Witnesses have proved he acted as a Captain.  Mr. Phipps. 
He was taken, and sure if he was taken, he must have his Commission with him.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Examine the Marshal, he took an Account of him; and by direction of Mr. Vaughan himself, he entered him as Captain; and he entered several men in the Ship as Frenchmen, by their own direction. (Mr. Crittenden was called) Mr. Crittenden, have you got your Book in which you made the Entry?  Mr. Crittenden. 
Yes, I have it.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
By whose Order did you enter them?  Mr. Crittenden. 
By the direction of Captain Vaughan, the Prisoner at the Bar.  Mr. Cowper. 
How did you know he was a Captain?  Mr. Crittenden. 
Because he told me he was Captain, and I entered him as such in my Book.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Captain of what?  Mr. Crittenden. 
The Loyal Clancarty?  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Pray read your Entry in your Book.  Mr. Crittenden. 
Thomas Vaughan, Captain, Irishman, the 14 th' of July 1695. and so of all the rest of the Ship's Crew.  Mr. Justice Turton. 
Did you write these in the presence of Capt. Vaughan?  Mr. Crittenden. 
Yes, in the same Room where he was.  Mr. Phipps. 
Did you write it by his direction?  Mr. Crittenden. 
For his own part, by his direction; and for the rest, by their direction.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Take all the circumstances together, it is great evidence, considering what they were about, and what Vessel they had. Mr. Crittenden, can you tell how many Frenchmen were there.  Mr. Crittenden. 
I will tell you presently (he counts them in his Book) there were thirteen.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Did Captain Vaughan hear any of them bid you enter them as Frenchmen?  Mr. Crittenden. 
I cannot be positive in that, I suppose he did, he was in the same Room.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Do you expect Witnesses from France, to testify where they were Born and Christened?  Mr. Phipps 
One Witness says there was not one Frenchman there.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Not to his Knowledge.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
What do you know of his having a French Commission?  Mr. Bullock. 
I did not see it.  Mr. Whitaker. 
Did he own his having any French Commission?  Mr. Bullock. 
I cannot tell.  Mr. Justice Turton. 
He owned himself a Captain.  Mr. Phipps. 
He might be a Captain in another Ship, but not in this Ship; they ought to prove he was Captain at that time, in that Ship, by the French Kings Commission.  L. C. J. Holt. 
All the Witnesses say he Acted as a Captain at that time.  Mr. Cowper. 
He owned himself the Captain of the Loyal Clancarty.  Mr. Bar. Powis. 
What can be plainer, than that he owned himself Captain?  Dr. Oldish. 
This seems to me a very strange proof, to be built only upon the sayings of these Persons, that they were Frenchmen, and this to a man who had no Authority to examine them, when it might have been easily proved in a regular way, in case they had been so; they might have been examined before a Magistrate, and thereby it would have appeared whether they were French or no. And 'twas absolutely necessary in this case, because of the contrariety of the Witnesses; for the first Witness said, there was no Frenchman aboard; the next said there were two Frenchmen and a Dutchman; and Crutenden said, there were 13. Now how can these be reconciled, unless there had been a Legal Examination of the Parties? But the thing we would chiefly go on is this, I think they have sailed in the Foundation of the Treason; that is, to prove the Prisoner a Subject of this Crown; neither is there the least colour of proof thereof. At Night he came to Mr. Crittenden, and is in drink, there he says he is an Irishman; the next morning, when he is examined before the Justices, than he comes in a kind of Judgement, and then such a confession would be of moment; but then he confesses himself to be a Frenchman of Martenico. Now, my Lord, what credit is to be given to these confessions; when before the Marshal he shall say, I am an Irishman; and the next day, when he is on examination, he declares himself a Frenchman; in one confession he is in drink, in the other sober? Now, my Lord, I say, what proof is here? Here then the Foundation of the Treason fails: For the Indictment is, That he being a Subject of the King of England, levies War. Now my Lord, it this Quality be not proved, all the rest of the Indictment falls to the ground: for it is impossible for him to commit Treason, where he is not a Subject, because there can be no Violation of Allegiance. So that if he be a Frenchman, as he declared before the Justices, he cannot be guilty of Treason. So that here they have failed in the Foundation of all; that is, to prove him a Subject of England. And because they affirm him to be so, it lies on those that affirm it, to prove it. But perhaps now they will say, that these little confessions of his will throw the burden of proof on him. By no means; when here is a stronger presumption on the other side; a mere extrajudicial saying to Seamen, that he is an Irishman, cannot balance his confession examined before the Justices, wherein he says he is a Frenchman; and so can never throw the burden of proof on him. Therefore it lies on them that assert this, to prove it. But, my Lord, though it doth not lie on him, yet we will prove him to be a Frenchman, and born at Martenico, by those that were at the christening of him, and have known him from time to time ever since. And because they say he can speak English, if you please to examine him, you shall hear him speak Natural French; so that that cannot prove him to be a Natural Irishman.  Mr. Phipps. 
Such a Saying of a Foreigner will be of no great weight; because if a man go into a Foreign Country, he may say he is that Countryman, to get the more favour.  L. C. J. Holt. 
What, to hang himself?  Mr. Phipps. 
No, my Lord, a man that comes into a strange Country, may very well think he shall find better usage, by pretending to be of that Country, than by owning himself to be a Foreigner. But we will prove Vaughan to be a Frenchman. Call Robert French. (Then Rob. French was sworn) Mr. French, Pray give the Court and Jury an account, whether you know Mr. Vaughan, the Prisoner at the Bar, and how long you have known him, and what Countryman you take him to be, and the Reason why.  Rob. French. 
I have known him this 14 years.  Mr. Phipps. 
Where did you see him then?  Rob. French. 
I saw him in Saint Christopher's.  Mr. Phipps. 
Pray give an Account how you came to know him.  Rob. French. 
About 16 years ago I was at Mount-Surat, and I came to St. Christopher's, and there I chanced to come into English Ground, among the Factors; and so they brought me to the French Ground; and coming there, I was in company with several others that Night, and it happened I was told there was one Mr. Vaughan there; and I coming acquainted with him, he showed me this Youth (he was a Youth then); He told me he was his Son, and recommended him to me, because he looked on me to be a man in trust and business.  Mr. Phipps. 
From that time what has he been reputed?  Rob. French. 
A Seafaring man.  Mr. Phipps. 
But what Countryman?  Rob. French. 
To be born in Martenico.  Mr. Phipps. 
In whose Dominion is that?  Rob. French. 
In the French King's Dominion.  Mr. Justice Turton. 
What occasion had you to discourse of the place of his birth?  Rob. French. 
Because his Father was looked upon to be a Frenchman.  Mr. Justice Turton. 
His Father was a Frenchman.  Rob. French. 
Yes, my Lord, and lived at Martenico.  Mr. Cowper. 
How old might he be at that time?  Rob. French. 
About fifteen or sixteen.  Mr. Cowper. 
How came you to be talking of his birth, and with whom?  Rob. French. 
One that was talking with me, told me, his Name was Vaughan, and that he was born there.  Mr. Cowper. 
What introduced this discourse? How came he to tell you this, that he was born in that place?  Rob. French. 
His Father told me so.  Mr. Cowper. 
You were talking of one Vaughan of his Name; How many were in company when there was this talk?  Rob. French. 
There were many of them.  Mr. Cowper. 
Name them.  Rob. French. 
It is so long ago, I cannot remember them.  Mr. Cowper. 
Name as many as you can of them, as many as you do remember.  Rob. French. 
One Mr. Bodiken, a Factor.  Mr. Cowper. 
Who else?  Rob. French. 
Several others.  Mr. Cowper. 
You named one Vaughan before.  Rob. French. 
Yes, I did.  Mr. Cowper. 
But you had forgot him now.  Rob. French. 
No, there was one Vaughan.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Were there any more?  Rob. French. 
Yes, there was. I remember the company that went along with me.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Who were they?  Rob. French. 
There were several Passengers that went over with me.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How came you to talk of this man's Nativity?  Rob. French. 
Because his Father said, he had not been out of the Island in 20 years (at which the People laughed.)  Mr. Cowper. 
What place was this discourse in?  Rob. French. 
At St. Christopher's.  Mr. Cowper. 
How did his Father's saying, he had not been out of that Island in 20 years, prove his Son was born there?  Rob. French. 
Because he recommended him to me as a Seafaring man.  Mr. Cowper. 
What is that a Reason of? What is that to his being born at Martenico?  Mr. Justice Turton. 
What Countryman are you?  Rob. French. 
I am an Irishman born.  L. C. J. Holt. 
His Father acknowledged himself to be an Irishman born, did he not?  Rob. French. 
No, my Lord, he did not say where he was born: I do not know.  Mr. Justice Turton. 
Have you continued any acquaintance with Mr. Vaughan since? How long did you stay at St. Christopher's?  Rob. French. 
I stayed but four and twenty hours, to take in water.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How long was it after this, before you saw this Gentleman, Captain Vaughan?  Rob. French. 
I never saw him since, till I saw him in London. (Then the People laughed)  L. C. J. Holt. 
Pray Gentlemen have patience. How do you know now that this is the same Man, that you saw fourteen years ago? For there must he a great alteration in a Man in fourteen years' time, from what was at that time, being but fifteen years of Age.  Rob. French. 
I believe in my Conscience this is the Man.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Can you take it upon your Oath he is the Man?  Mr. Bar. Powis. 
In what Language had you this Discourse?  L. C. J. Holt. 
How long were you in company with him and his Father?  Rob. French. 
I believe five or six hours.  Mr. Bar. Powis. 
In what Language was this Discourse with his Father?  Rob. French. 
My Lord, he spoke English, a sort of broken English.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Where do you live yourself?  Rob. French. 
I live in Ireland.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How long have you lived there?  Rob. French. 
Nine or Ten Years.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Whereabout in Ireland?  Rob. French. 
In Connaught.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Nine or Ten Years?  Rob. French. 
Yes, my Lord.  Dr. Littleton. 
Did not Captain Vaughan, nor his Father speak Irish to you in that six hours?  Rob. French. 
No, my Lord.  Mr. Justice Turton. 
How long have you been in England?  Rob. French. 
Not above two Months.  Mr. Justice Turton. 
Did you hear of Captain Vaughan being to be tried?  Rob. French. 
No, my Lord.  Mr. Justice Turton. 
How did he come to hear of you then?  Rob. French. 
I heard he was in Town.  L. C. J. Holt. 
It is a strange thing, you have a most admirable memory, and Captain Vaughan has as good a memory as you; that you should never have any intercourse for fourteen years, and yet should remember one an other after so long a time; It is a wondered thing too, that when he could not know you were in Town, and yet should call you a Witness on his behalf, sure he must have the Spirit of Prophecy.  Rob. French. 
He did not send to me at all.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How did you come to be here then?  Rob. French. 
I will tell you, It was my custom always to go and see Prisoners, and I heard there were Prisoners in Newgate, so I went to Newgate, and I met with one Dwall, and I asked him of another Gentleman that was there; and I went to the other side by chance, and I met with Captain Vaughan.  L. C. J. Holt. 
What was thy Design? Why didst thou visit Newgate?  Rob. French. 
Because it was my custom, because it was an Act of Charity.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Did you go to Newgate out of Charity?  Rob. French. 
I went to see my Friend, and carried a Letter to him. I went out of Charity.  Mr. Phipps. 
You were in the West-Indies, upon the French ground; don't they speak English on the French ground, and French on the English ground?  Rob. French. 
Yes.  Mr. Cowper. 
So they do here. Did you ever see Captain Vaughan before that time?  Rob. French. 
No.  Mr. Whitaker. 
Did you visit lately any other Prisoners in Newgate, besides Captain Vaughan?  Rob. French. 
Yes.  Mr. Whitaker. 
Give their Names.  Rob. French. 
I have visited Mr. Noland, and another Gentleman that is with him, and I went into the house and drank with him there.  Mr. Whitaker. 
What is that other Gentleman's Name?  Rob. French. 
I do not remember his Name at present, but he is a Companion of Mr. Nolands'.  Mr. Whitaker. 
Do you know him if you see him?  Rob. French. 
ay, I would.  L. C. J. Treby. 
How long have you been in England?  Rob. French. 
But two Months.  L. C. J. Treby. 
Have you usually visited Prisoners in former years?  Rob. French. 
My Lord, wherever I have been, it was my custom to do so.  L. C. J. Treby. 
But how doth it consist, that you, who are an Irishman, should come hither to visit Prisoners in Newgate?  Rob. French. 
I can prove under my Lord Mayor of Dublins hand, that I came here upon business; and I went to the Prison to visit the Prisoners for Charity sake, and did bestow it according as I was able.  L. C. J. Holt. 
You had best stay there, and not go away, for we may have occasion to ask you some questions.  Mr. Cowper. 
Do you not use, out of Charity, to be evidence for them?  Rob. French. 
No, never before now in my Life.  Mr. Whitaker. 
What other Prisons have you visited, besides Newgate?  Rob. French. 
I did visit none.  L. C. L. Treby. 
Had you no Charity for other Prisons?  Mr. Bar. Powis. 
When you so visit Prisons, on what Account is it? Is it to give Ghostly advice?  Rob. French. 
Upon a Charitable Account, my Lord.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Ghostly Advice, is Charity.  Mr. Phipps. 
Where is Mr. Lefleur? (He did not appear) Call Mr. Gold, who appeared,)  Cl. of Arr. 
That Man is attainted, but pardoned.  Mr. Phipps. 
Mr. Gold, how long have you known Captain Vaughan?  Mr. Gold. 
I never knew Mr. Vaughan, before I saw him in the Marshalsea.  Mr. Phipps. 
Is Monsieur Lefleur here? Is Mr. Deherty here? (Mr. Deherty appeared, and was Sworn.)  Mr. Phipps. 
Do you know Mr. Vaughan, the Prisoner at the Bar?  Mr. Deherty. 
Yes.  Mr. Phipps. 
How long have you known him?  Mr. Deherty. 
Five Years.  Mr. Phipps. 
What has he been reputed all along, since you have known him?  Mr. Deherty. 
Frenchman.  Mr. Phipps. 
Did you know him in France?  Mr. Deherty. 
Yes, and he was reputed a Frenchman there.  Mr. Justice. Turton. 
What occasion had you to inquire into that, the place of his Nativity?  Mr. Deherty. 
I did not inquire at all, and one that was his Servant, was my Comrade a great while.  Mr. Phipps. 
Now we will prove where he was Christened, by one that was at his Christening, Mr. Dascine. (He appeared, and stood up, being Sworn, and spoke in French to the Court, pretending he could not speak English.)  L. C. J. Holt. 
If he cannot speak English, there must be an Interpreter.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
They must find an Interpreter, he is their Witness.  
Then a Person in Court stood up, and told the Court he could speak English as well as he, that he had been a Bailiffs Follower for several years.  L. C. J. Holt. 
You can speak English, can you not?  Mr. Dascine. 
I will speak as well as I can.  
King's Messenger. I am a Messenger to the King, do you not know me?  Mr. Dascine. 
Yes.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Prithee speak English.  Mr. Dascine. 
As well as I can, my Lord, I will speak.  Mr. Phipps. 
Are you sworn?  Mr. Dascine. 
Yes, my Lord.  Mr. Phipps. 
Do you know Captain Vaughan?  Mr. Dascine. 
In 1669. I was in Saint Christopher's; I went from Rhoan, and from thence I went with Hats and Cloth to Crebeck, and had a Letter to one Thomas Williams, a Factor in Martenico. And after I had done, as I was coming away, Mr. Williams desired me to go to a Christening, a mile and Half from Port-Royal. He told me, there was one Mr. Vaughan had a Plantation there, and desired him to be Godfather. And about two days after, I went from Port-Royal to St. Christopher's again, and I came to Rhoan again in a Ship called St. Joseph. So in 1677, I went to St. Christopher's again, and from thence to Martenico, to Mr. Williams; I asked him, what is become of that Young man we were at the Christening, and so he showed me him that is here (pointing to the Prisoner.)  L. C. J. Holt. 
That was in 1677.  Mr. Dascine. 
In 1677. So I came from Port-Royal; I went to St. Christopher's, and so took Sail, and came to France again. And 13 years ago I went to St. Christopher's again, and to Mountserat, and Martenico; and so when I was at Martenico, and asked Mr. Williams of this Young man, that I was at his Christening, and he said, He is at such an House, and I saw him there.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Thirteen Years ago.  Mr. Dascine. 
And we went and drank Punch together, and I came back for Rhoan.  L. C. J. Holt. 
When did you see him since that?  Mr. Dascine. 
Never till I saw him here a Prisoner.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How do you know he is the man?  Mr. Dascine. 
He has a bruise in his side.  Mr. Phipps. 
What was the Gentleman's Name, at the Christening of whose child you were?  Mr. Dascine. 
Thomas Vaughan.  Mr. Phipps. 
What was the child's Name?  Mr. Dascine. 
Thomas Vaughan.  Mr. Phipps. 
When you went the next time to Martenico, did Mr. Williams, you speak of, that was the Godfather, present this Person, Capt. Vaughan, to you, as the man who was then christened?  Mr. Dascine. 
Yes, the next time.  Mr. Phipps. 
Now is Captain Vaughan, that stands at the Bar, that very Gentleman?  Mr. Dascine. 
I am sure it is he.  L. C. J. Holt. 
You say this meeting was about 1669.  Mr. Dascine. 
Yes.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Pray what was the reason you were so inquisitive to know what became of that Person that was christened when you was there?  Mr. Dascine. 
Because I being at the Christening, I asked him how the child did.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How came you to take such extraordinary Observation of that child? Was he such a remarkable child?  Dr. Newton. 
Where were you born?  Mr. Dascine. 
In France.  Mr. Whitaker. 
What are You?  Mr. Dascine. 
A Barber by Trade.  L. C. J. Holt. 
What Employment have you?  Mr. Dascine. 
An Officer in the Marshal's Court sometimes.  Mr. Justice Turton. 
What was this man's Father, what sort of man was he?  Mr. Dascine. 
A tall man.  Mr. Bar. Powis. 
What was his Father's Name?  Mr. Dascine. 
Thomas Vaughan.  Mr. Justice Turton. 
Was his Father living when you was there the second time?  Mr. Dascine. 
The last time I was there I did not see his Father, but I saw his Father the second time.  Mr. Justice Turton. 
But you saw Mr. Williams, his Godfather?  Mr. Dascine. 
Yes.  Mr. Phipps. 
Call Simon Danneaun.  Tho. Vaughan. 
My Lord, he is sick, and not able to come out of his bed.  Mr. Phipps. 
Call Francis Harvey (who was sworn.)  Mr. Phipps. 
Do you know Captain Vaughan?  Fr. Harvey. 
Sir, In the year 1693. I was in France, with one Captain Bontee, who was taken Prisoner in August the same year; and my Captain he had the liberty to go upto Paris with a Guard, for his pleasure, and to learn the Speech. And, as it happened, we came to lodge in a street, called, Dolphinstreet, at the sign of the Crown. And there was some Gentlemen, that were there to learn the Speech, that were my Countrymen; and there was a Young man there, and he was acquainted over the way, where this Gentleman, Capt. Vaughan lodged; He lodged at his Aunts, that sold Silks, her Name was Madam Wotton; I saw this Gentleman there; I am sure it is he; and with that I came acquainted with him, as well as the rest●  Mr. Phipps. 
What was he reputed there?  Fr. Harvey. 
A Captain of a Ship.  Mr. Phipps. 
What did he go for there? a Frenshman, or an Englishman, or an Irishman?  Fr. Harvey. 
He went for a Frenchman, as I heard; One time his Aunt, she said, that he was born in the West Indies, at Martenico, and that he was her Sister's Son, that lived in Martenico.  Mr. Sol. Gen. 
You say he was a Captain of a Ship; what Ship?  Fr. Harvey. 
That I cannot tell.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
When was that?  Fr. Harvey. 
In 1693.  Mr. Phipps. 
Is Mr. Le-fleur here!  Cl. of Arr. 
He is a Prisoner in the Savoy; he was taken in the same Ship with Mr. Vaughan.  Mr. Phipps. 
It is reasonable he should have been here, to give an Account of the Prisoner.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Then they should have taken care to have had him here. Have you any more Witnesses?  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
I think we have given sufficient Evidence that he is an Irishman: but now we shall show you, that all your Witnesses have given a very extravagant Evidence to prove that he is a Frenchman. All he hoped for was, that the Prosecutors for the King could not be able to prove him an Irishman; He believed there were but 3 men could prove him so; that was David Creagh and 2 more; and so he writes to David Creagh, and tells him, That his life was in his power, and he hoped he and the other 2 would not discover it. This David Creagh was his Neighbour in Ireland; We will call him to prove that Capt. Vaughan was born at Galloway in Ireland.  Mr. Whitaker. 
And here is his Letter under his Hand. Bring David Creagh, (who was sworn.)  Mr. Cowper. 
I desire, before he give his Evidence, he may look upon those that have given Evidence about the Prisoner, one by one. (Then he looked up on Rob. French). Mr. Creagh, do you know him?  Dau. Creagh. 
No. (Than he looked upon the rest.)  Mr. Cowper. 
Have you had any of these men come to you on a message?  D. Creagh. 
No, Sir.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Do you know Tho. Vaughan, the Prisoner at the Bar?  D. Creagh. 
Yes, I do.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
How long have you known him?  D. Creagh. 
About 2 years.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Was that your first Acquaintance with him?  D. Creagh. 
Yes.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
What place was he born at, as you have heard?  D. Creagh. 
At Galloway in Ireland.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
From whom did you hear it?  D. Creagh. 
From all persons that I have heard speak of him.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Did he ever own to you that he was born there?  D. Creagh. 
Yes oftentimes in my company.  Mr. Sol. Gen. 
Did you ever receive a Letter from him about your giving Evidence in this matter?  D. Creagh. 
Yes, Sir.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Do you know this Letter? (which was shown him.)  D. Creagh. 
Yes, Sir.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Do you know his Hand?  D. Creagh. 
Yes, I partly know it.  Mr. Whitaker. 
Did you ever see him Write?  D. Creagh. 
This is the Letter I received from him.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Read it. Do you think it is his Hand?  D. Creagh. 
I cannot swear it; but I believe it is his Hand.  Mr. Phipps. 
Have you seen him Write?  D. Creagh. 
I have seen him Write several times.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Do you believe it is his Hand?  D. Creagh. 
Yes, my Lord, but I cannot swear it.  
Then the Letter was read.  
To Mr. David Creagh, in Newgate, These.  Mr. Creagh, 
I have some assurance that Mr. Whitaker has no Witness to prove me a Subject of England, but you, and Two more, which I am glad of with all my heart; I hope I may have none against me that wish me worse than you and Capt. Etherington. If Mr. Whitaker has not Sworn you yet, I hope you will not appear against me. I declare, if I had more than my Life, I would lay it in your hand. I am like to be sent to Newgate this Day, and it is like you and some more will be sent here, that we may not talk together. The Dutch Dogs took from me Eleven Hundred Dollars in money, which certainly troubles me more than the thoughts of Death, which I value not a Straw; but I hope in 4 or 5 days to be supplied. I fear they will keep me close. I have all the liberty imaginable here to write, and my Friends suffered to see me. I can say nothing that is comfortable, but that I am very well in health, and nothing concerned, if my money come in time.  
Friday morning. T. Vaughan.  Mr. Phipps. 
Is that Letter proved? That is not to the purpose. Nor of any weight considering who proves it.  L. C. J. Holt. 
No, that none could prove him a Subject, but he and two more?  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
We will produce only one Witness more, call Mr. Jo. Rivet. The Court being informed by some Gentlemen then on the Bench, that there was a Gentleman then in Court one Mr. Rivet, who being of Galloway; could Probably give some Account of the Prisoner, he was immediately called, and required to depose what he knows.  Jo. Rivet. 
My Lord. I am sorry I am called, where Life is concerned, when I came hither only out of curiosity; but the Service I owe to this Government, obliges me to speak what I know, now I am called to it. (Then he was Sworn.)  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Do you know the Prisoner at the Bar? what Countryman is he?  I Rivet. 
I have known him a great many years, we were Children together in the same Town, we lived in Galloway in Ireland. I known his Father, and Mother, and Brothers, and Sisters; and I remember him a Child, as long as I can remember any thing, I cannot determine to a certain number of years; and I remember him not only a Schoolboy, but also an Apprentice to one Mr. Coleman. And I wonder very much at what Mr. French says, for by the Name and Place of his Birth, he must have Sworn what he knows to be otherwise: For the French's are a Family in Galloway; his Father was an Honest Gentleman, and went over into Ireland in the Rebellion in 1641. and he there married a Woman, a Native of Galloway, and had several children, one of which, in the latter end of, K. Charles' Reign, turned Papist, and I believe the grief for it hastened his Father's death. I own part of the Evidence may be true, about his being in the West Indies, but his mother, I believe, was never out of Ireland in her life.  Dr. Oldish. 
What was his Father's Name?  
Jo. Rivet. John.  L. C. J. Holt. 
You say, you knew this very Gentleman an Apprentice to one Thomas Coleman at Galloway.  Jo. Rivet. 
I did so, my Lord.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How long is it since you saw him?  J. Rivet. 
I cannot be positive, I think at the reduction of Galloway in 1691. I cannot say whether at or after; but I saw him about that time, and knew him, and have known him from a Child; I knew him a Schoolboy, and knew his Brothers.  Mr. Justice Turton. 
What year did you know him first?  J. Rivet. 
I dare not be positive, I remember him particularly well.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Are you sure this is the Man?  J. Rivet. 
I know him as well as any face I ever saw. I came accidentally into Court out of Curiosity; and one that knew me, that was of Galloway, gave Account to the King's Counsel, and so I am called to give evidence.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Do you know this Rob. French?  Jo. Rivet. 
I cannot say I know him, for I see him but in the Dark; if I saw him in a better light, it may be I may. (Then Rob. French was set up for Mr. Rivet to see him) I think I recollect the face, I am not certain.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Do you know this Gentleman?  Rob. French. 
No, my Lord.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Where did you live?  Rob. French. 
In Connaught.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Did you know John Vaughan of Galloway?  Rob. French. 
I have heard of him, my Lord.  Mr. Bar. Powis. 
What Trade was the Prisoner's Father?  Jo. Rivet. 
He had the Market several years, he lived very well, and kept a Public House in the Town.  Mr. Phipps. 
Did you know any other Thomas Vaughan but this?  Rob. French. 
No, not in Galloway.  Jo. Rivet. 
This may be a confirmation of what I say; if it be thesame Gentleman, his hair is reddish.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Pull off his Periwig (which was done.)  T. Vaughan. 
My hair is not red.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How are his Eyebrows?  T. Vaughan. 
A dark brown, my Lord, the same as my Wig.  Mr. Bar. Powis. 
Let some body look on it more particularly, (than an Officer took a Candle, and looked on his Head, but it was shaved so close, the colour could not be discerned).  Mr. Phipps. 
We can give an Answer to this, my Lord; we shall prove, that there was one John Vaughan at Galloway, and he had a Son Thomas, that died ten years ago. As for Mr. Rivet, he is a mere stranger to us, we know nothing of him; and by what I can perceive, he comes in as a Volunteer, not subpoena'd by either side. And for Mr. Creagh, we shall show he is not to be credited in any thing, for we shall prove him guilty of Felony, and that he Swore, that if his Brother would not supply him with Money, he would swear Treason against him, and shop him in Newgate; and that he should not come out till he came upon a Sledge; and if so, there is no body surely can believe he will stick at Perjury, or Forgery, or any thing else, which may be for his advantage; Call Mr. Christopher Crey (who was Sworn.)  Mr. Phipps. 
Pray do you know David Creagh?  C. Creagh. 
Yes.  Mr. Phipps. 
Is he any relation to you?  C. Creagh. 
Yes, he is my Brother.  Mr. Phipps. 
Give the Court and the Jury an account what you know of your Brother.  C. Creagh. 
It is an unnatural thing to come on this occasion, and I am sorry I am called on this account.  David. Creagh. 
Speak what you have to say.  Mr. Phipps. 
What do you know of your Brother, whether you have not found him guilty of stealing any thing?  C. Creagh. 
My Lord, I am upon my Oath, I have known something of it, he has stolen some Gold from me.  L. C. J. Holt. 
You pretend to be so very nice, you are to Answer to what you know of his reputation in general, and of his way of living.  C. Creagh. 
His reputation has been but very slender, I am very sorry for it; several in the Court can give Account of it, as well as I. He served a Relation of his in Newcastle, he served there some time, and came to Town, and came to me, and depended upon me, and I subsisted him; and he took an opportunity one day, when I and my Wife were gone abroad, and no body at home but the Maid, and went up stairs, where my Wife's Room is, and there being a Sash-Window, he opens it, and took out of my Wife's Closet several pieces of Gold.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How did you know that he did it?  C. Creagh. 
I found it out afterwards; he was my Brother, and therefore I did not Prosecute him. I did not know he had it, till afterwards, that I found to whom he had disposed of the Gold. I enquired who was in the House, and thought the Maid had it; and she said none had been there, but my Brother; and he at last owned the Fact, and I had it again.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Have you any more to say of your Brother?  Mr. Phipps. 
Did he ever threaten to swear against you?  T. Vaughan. 
Or me?  C. Creagh. 
He has been confined in Newgate Eighteen Months, and I subsisted him in Charity, I allowed him all along; and he has been sending to me by several messages, that if I subsisted him not with more Money, than I did allow him, he would swear me into a Plot.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Did he tell you so?  C. Creagh. 
No, but he has sent me word so.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Is the Man here that he sent you this word by?  C. Crey. 
Yes, the Man is here.  Mr. Phipps. 
Let him stand up.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Where do you live?  C. Creagh. 
In Watlin-street, I am a Merchant; I declare it is not in favour or affection, but only in conscience, that I declare this.  D. Creagh. 
This is only to hinder me from giving my evidence against a Merchant that I have taken up.  T. Vaughan. 
What Character had he in Spain?  
Then David Creagh spoke, but was not heard.  L. C. J. Holt. 
What do you say of the Gold?  C. Creagh. 
He had it, my Lord.  D. Creagh. 
Why did you not Prosecute me then, if I had it?  L. C. J. Holt. 
You are not sure he took the Gold.  C. Creagh. 
I was so sure he had it, because I had it from him again by another hand.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Did he tell you so, that he had it?  C. Creagh. 
No, but I had a Letter about it.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Where is that Letter?  C. Creagh. 
I have it not here.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Give not an evidence of a Letter, without the Letter were here, it ought to have been produced.  Mr. Phipps. 
Call Christopher Heyden (he was Sworn.) Do you give the Court an Account what David Creagh has said to you of Swearing against any Body.  C. Heyden. 
Several times, when my Master has sent me to him, to pay him Five Shillings a Week, or Five and Six Pence a Week, to subsist him.  Dr. Oldish. 
Who are you Servant to?  C. Creagh. 
He is my Servant.  C. Heyden. 
This David Creagh has oftentimes told me, that I should tell his Brother, that if he would not supply him with more Money, he would Swear against him. When I came to the Sessions-House, when the Pirates were tried the first time. I was going through the Bail-Dock, where this David Creagh called to me; and I asked him what he did here? he said he was to be evidence against Captain Vaughan. No certainly, said I, you do not know him; do you? Says he, here's the thing, it had been better for me, that I had been an evidence against him before this; and I am forced to be an evidence against him, to save myself: And he bid me tell his Brother, God damn his Soul to all Eternity, if he did not send him supply that day, he would have him in Newgate, and that he should not come out again, till he came out upon a Sledge.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Did he say so?  C. Heyden. 
Yes, my Lord.  D. Creagh. 
How long is it agone, Mr. Heyden?  C. Heyden. 
It was the day the Pirates were tried; more than that, here was Mr. Wroths Man was with me at the same time; and because he should not hear what you said, you took me to the door.  Mr. Phipps. 
Is Daniel Bryan here? (He appeared, and was Sworn.)  Dan. Bryan. 
I was subpoena'd here for I know not what: For I know not Captain Vaughan.  Mr. Phipps. 
Give me leave to ask you a Question. Do you know, or have heard of David Creagh?  Dan. Bryan. 
Yes, Sir.  Mr. Phipps. 
Will you give Account of what he has said of Swearing against any Body?  Dan. Bryan. 
He has threatened his Brother several times, that if he would not send him relief, he would bring him in for something, and would inform against him.  Mr. Phipps. 
Did he say he would Swear against him?  Dan. Bryan. 
He did say he would inform against him.  Mr. Phipps. 
What did you hear him say of Swearing against any one?  Dan. Bryan. 
He said, he had rather others should perish, than himself.  Mr. Whitaker. 
This Man was Condemned for the same Crime.  Mr. Phipps. 
Mr. Vaughan, have you any other Witnesses? Call Creighton (who was Sworn.) What Countryman are you?  Creighton. 
A Connaught-Man, I was Born in Galloway, I believe Mr. Rivet knows me.  Mr. Phipps. 
Did you know one John Vaughan, that lived at Galloway?  Creighton. 
I knew him very well.  Mr. Phipps. 
Do you know the Prisoner at the Bar?  Creighton. 
No.  Mr. Phipps. 
Do you remember, that that Jo. Vaughan had a Son Thomas, and what became of him?  Creighton. 
Yes, he had a Son Thomas, but I understood that he went somewhere into the Country, and there died, and it was spread all about the Town.  Mr. Phipps. 
Do you know what he died of?  Creighton. 
I cannot tell.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How long ago did he die?  Creighton. 
About Ten Years ago. I knew all the Brothers.  Mr. Phipps. 
Did you know that Thomas Vaughan?  Creighton. 
I knew him very well.  Mr. Phipps. 
Is that Gentleman, the Prisoner, he?  Creighton. 
No.  Mr. Phipps. 
Do you believe that is not the Man?  Creighton. 
I believe not.  Mr. Phipps. 
Did you ever know any other Thomas Vaughan?  Creighton. 
No.  Mr. J. Turton. 
Had not John Vaughan a Son Apprentice at Galloway to one Thomas Coleman?  Creighton. 
Not as I know of.  Mr. J. Turton. 
How old was that Son, Thomas Vaughan when you knew, him?  Creighton. 
I was Born at the next Door to that Thomas Vaughan that was reputed to be Dead.  Mr. J. Turton. 
Was not that Thomas Vaughan Apprentice to Mr. Coleman?  Creighton. 
I cannot certainly tell.  Mr. J. Turton. 
How old was that Thomas Vaughan when he went away from Galloway?  Creighton. 
I cannot tell.  Mr. J. Turton. 
What is your own Age?  Creighton. 
My Age is about Five and twenty.  L. C. J. Holt. 
You have not seen him in ten Years?  Creighton. 
No, my Lord.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Can you take it upon your Oath, this is not the Man you saw ten Years ago, that Thomas Vaughan that you knew?  Creighton. 
Yes, my Lord.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How old was he when you were acquainted with him?  Creighton. 
I cannot tell certainly; I believe he might be about fifteen.  L. J. C. Holt. 
How long is that since?  Creighton. 
Ten Years.  L. C. J. Holt. 
What is your Name?  Creighton. 
Creighton.  Mr. Cowper. 
You say you knew him ten Years ago; Pray what sort of Person was he, and how did he differ from this Man?  Creighton. 
He was better Set, and not quite so Tall as this Man, and full of the Smallpox; he was the quarrelsomst Boy in the whole Town.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
You say he was not quite so Tall as this Man.  Creighton. 
No, he was not quite so Tall.  Mr. Soll. Gen. 
Do you think he might not grow since? This was ten Years ago, when he was but fifteen Years old.  Mr. Cowper. 
You knew him at fifteen; How long had you known him?  Creighton. 
From my Infancy, till he departed the Town.  Mr. Cowper. 
During all that time what Employment was he in? Tell some Circumstances.  Creighton. 
I think this Vaughan went to one Mr. Russel's School.  Mr. Cowper. 
What to do?  Creighton. 
To learn to write and read.  Mr. Cowper. 
And was he not an Apprentice in that time?  Creighton. 
I cannot tell.  Mr. Cowper. 
Were you acquainted with him?  Creighton. 
Yes.  L. C. J. Holt. 
You lived next Door to him, Sure you must be acquainted with him?  Creighton. 
He was a fight Boy, for I remember he did once thrash my Coat sound.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Where do you live now?  Creigton. 
At the Castle and Falcon in Aldersgate-street.  L. C. J. Holt. 
What Trade are you?  Creighton. 
A Shoemaker.  Mr. Bar. Powis. 
How long have you lived here?  Creighton. 
This ten Years.  Mr. Bar. Powis. 
What did that Thomas Vaughan die of, that you say was dead before you came away, as it was reported up and down?  Creighton. 
I cannot tell.  Mr. Cowper. 
Just now you said he went away from Galloway, and it was reported then that he was dead ten Years ago; now you say you have been in England ten Years.  Creighton. 
I came into England about ten Years ago.  Mr. Cowper. 
Did you hear it at Galloway before you came away?  Creighton. 
I heard it at Galloway before I came to London, and there are many can testify that there was a Report that he was dead.  Mr. J. Turton. 
How long was he gone from Galloway before you came away?  Creighton. 
I cannot say to an Hour; I heard he was dead.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Well, well, he went away from Galloway.  Mr. J. Turton. 
Have you not been here twelve Years?  Creighton. 
I think not; I came a little before the Revolution.  Mr. J. Turton. 
That is eight Year ago. Just now you said you had been here ten Years.  Mr. Phipps. 
Call John Kine. (Who was Sworn.) John Kine, Did you know one John Vaughan in Galloway?  Jo. Kine. 
Yes, I lived with him.  Mr. Phipps. 
What Children had he?  Jo. Kine. 
Four Sons.  Mr. Phipps. 
Had he any one of those Sons that was named Thomas?  Jo. Kine. 
Not of those four.  Mr. Phipps. 
Had he a Son Thomas?  Jo. Kine. 
Yes, he had; he died about ten or eleven Years old of the Smallpox.  Mr. Phipps. 
You say you lived with this John Vaughan; look upon the Prisoner at the Bar, Is he any of those Sons?  Jo. Kine. 
No, Sir, I never saw this Man till now.  Mr. Phipps. 
How long did you live with him?  Jo. Kine. 
About eight or nine Years?  Mr. Phipps. 
But how long have you been come away from him?  Jo. Kine. 
About ten Years.  Mr. J. Turton. 
How well do these two Witnesses agree together? The other said he died at fifteen, and was pitted with the Smallpox. This Man says he died at ten, and of the Smallpox.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Where do you live now?  Jo. Kine. 
I live in the City.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How long have you lived there?  Jo. Kine. 
Twelve Years.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How long was this Thomas Vaughan dead before you came hither?  Jo. Kine. 
Really I cannot be positive, I believe about eight or nine Years.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Did Thomas Vaughan die of the Smallpox?  Jo. Kine. 
Yes.  L. C. J. Holt. 
That you are sure of.  Jo. Kine. 
I am sure that was the Disease he died of.  L. C. J. Holt. 
You know him well, I believe.  Jo. Kine. 
Yes, my Lord.  L. C. J. Holt. 
How old was he when he died?  Jo. Kine. 
About ten Years.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Where was he buried?  Jo. Kine. 
At Galloway.  Mr. J. Turton. 
Why does not the Officer take Care? There is one talking with the Witness. Can you now reconcile your Evidence? (To the Prisoner's Council.)  L. C. J. Holt. 
Have you any more Witnesses?  Mr. Phipps. 
No, my Lord.  Mr. J. Turton. 
What were the Names of all the Sons?  Jo. Kine. 
The eldest was John Vaughan, the other William Vaughan, another Edward Vaughan, and another James Vaughan; that was all that he has alive.  Mr. Whitaker. 
There is never a Thomas Vaughan among these:  Mr. Cowper. 
Thomas died up and down in several Places:  Mr. Phipps. 
Mr. Rivet, Do you know the Sons of that John Vaughan?  Mr. Rivet. 
He had all these Sons, John, William, Thomas and James. He speaks of a Son Edward, I cannot exactly remember whether there was such a Son, or no; though I have a rude Idea of it, but am not certain. I knew this Thomas, I went to School with him, and I saw him in the Year 1691. about the surrender of Galloway.  Juryman. 
Is that Man at the Bar the same Thomas Vaughan?  Mr. Rivet. 
I am positive of that.  L. C. J. Holt. 
You saw him at the surrender of Galloway?  Mr. Rivet. 
I did; it was about that time.  Thomas Vaughan. 
I am a Subject of the Most Christian King, and I desire, though I speak English, that I may be Examined in French, in a Matter that touches me so near. And you may see by my Commission, my Lord, that I am a Frenchman; which I desire may be read.  L. C. J. Holt. 
We shall not trouble you with that.  T. Vaughan. 
I can show you my Commission, wherein the King, my Master, declares me to be a Subject of France.  Dr. Oldys. 
Mr. Vaughan, I think, you need not trouble the Court to read the Commission; the Commission is the same as for all other Subjects of the French King, wherein he is looked upon as a Natural born Subject of France; and so he owns himself upon his Examination before the Judge of the Admiralty.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Have you any more to say? As to the Examination, Who can prove that?  Mr. Cawley. 
I can prove that, my lord (Mr. Cawley was Sworn.)  L. C. J. Holt. 
Is that Thomas Vaughan's Examination?  Mr. Cawley. 
Yes, my Lord, it is signed by him; and taken before Sir Charles Hedges the 25th of July, 1695.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Read it. Then Mr. Cawley read the Examination of Thomas Vaughan.   

The 27th of July, 1695. Officium Domini contra Thomam Vaughan Capuem' Navicule, the Loyal Clencarty.  
The Examination of Thomas Vaughan late Commander of the Ship, the Loyal Clencarty, aged about Twenty Six Years, taken before the Right Worshipful Sir Charles Hedges, Kt. Judge of the High Court of Admiralty of England.  
THis Examinate saith, That he was born at Martinico within the Dominons of the French King, and is his Subject, but refuses to answer of what Parents he was born; That he came last from thence about four Years ago as Commander of a ship called the Hare, which had been before taken from the English, and came in her to Nants in France, and hath ever since been in France or cruizing in French Ships; That he hath been a Commander ever since he was sixteen years of age, and hath Commanded several French Privateers, and was Commander of a Privateer of St. Malo, called, the Granada of 36 Guns, which about two Years ago took the Diamond, and the Examinate was never till now taken. Being asked, Whether he ever lived in England, or in Ireland? he refuses to answer. Being asked, Whether he knew any thing of the taking and earrying of a Customhouse Boat from the Downs to Boulogne? or, Whether he was then in London, or did give directions to any Persons, or knew of her being carried off? he answered nothing, but said, That if any Person would prove it against him he was present to answer it: but saith, That in France he heard of her being brought to Boulogne; and he the Examinate bought her at Boulogne of the Men that carried her away, and that she cost him 900 and odd Livres, and was then called the Elizabeth and Ann, or Michael and Ann, but which, doth not remember; That he the Examinate still hath the said Vessel at Boulogne; That he cannot tell the names of the Persons he bought her of, and that took her away, but believes they had a Commission; That something above three Weeks ago the Examinate went with a Commission from the French King on board a two and twenty Oar-Barge, called the Loyal Clencarty then at Boulogne as Commander thereof, and on Monday last was a fortnight was taken by the Coventry Man of War at the Buoy in the Gunfleet; And that the Commander of the Coventry took away this Examinate's Commission, being asked upon what design he came out with the Barge, replied that it was not to take the Air; That the Barge formerly belonged to the Lord Danby, and was taken by a French Privateer about a Year ago; That before he came out, he met with two English Seamen upon the Court of Guards at Boulogne, who told the Examinate, That they had been taken Prisoners, and the Examinate took them in upon Charity; and afterwards met another English Man, who told the Examinate that he had been taken in Land Service, and believes it was before Fort Renoque; and the said Person sitting upon a Stone at Boulogne, and not knowing what to do with himself, the Examinate took him on Board for Charity, and designed to put the said three Persons ashore in England. Being asked whether he did not put in a Claim for the said Customhouse Boat by reason of her Captain? or, Whether the Persons that took her had any Commission from him? he the Examinate answered, That they that took her must answer for what they did, and he must answer for his Actions only.  Thomas Vaughan. Eodem die Capt' coram me C. Hedges.  
L. C. J. Holt. 
Mr. Vaughan, Have you any more to say?  Tho. Vaughan. 
It is very hard Circumstances I am under; if an English Man was in France, under the straits that I am here, it would be very hard for him to prove himself an English Man.  L. C. J. Holt. 
You have had a very fair Trial, and you shall have Justice, be it for you, or against you.  Tho. Vaughan. 
I hope your Lordship will do me Right.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Gentlemen of the Jury, The Prisoner at the Bar, Thomas Vaughan, stands Indicted for High-Treason, for adhering to the King's Enemies; viz: That he put himself as a Soldier in the Service of the French King, in a Vessel called the Loyal Clencarty, with divers other Persons on Board her, that were Subjects to the French King, and Enemies to the King of England, with a design to burn the King's, and his Subjects Ships; and for that purpose went in that Ship. That the Prisoner was on Board the Ship, and with such a design, is proved, without all Contradiction, by several Witnesses that have been produced; that is, that the Two and twenty Oar-barge, which is the same called the Loyal Clencarty, lay hover about the Buoy in the North; those Men in the Coventry imagined they had some design of Mischief to the Ships, and they made after him with the Coventry. It was apprehended by Captain Vaughan and his Crew, that the Coventry would be too hard for them, and so they did submit, and were taken. And being Examined on what account he came on our Coasts, it is confessed by him, That he came with a design to burn our Ships. You may observe what sort of Men were a Board. You have heard it proved to you, that Crittenden, the Marshal of Dover, entered those Persons taken a Board the French Vessel, of what Nation, and what Quality they were; and there were about a Dozen of these French Men, for they were entered as such. Now if a Subject of England to join with the King's Enemies, in pursuit of a design to burn or take any of the King's, or his Subjects Ships; that is, an adherance to the King's Enemies. But it appears, not only that Captain Vaughan was in their Company, but that he was their Commander; which Commanding the Vessel on Board, which were French Subjects Enemies of the King and the Kingdom of England, is High-Treason, and the particular Fact of Treason for which he is Indicted. And it appears that he had a Commission from the French King to command this Vessel, the Loyal Clencarty.  
Now the Prisoner having this Commission to be Commander of this Vessel, though they who served under him were not Native French Men but other Foreigners, yet their subjecting themselves to him, acting by Virtue or Colour of that Commission, makes them to be the French King's Subjects, during their continuance in that Service; for otherwise all Prizes, which they should take, would make them to be Pirates; which none will pretend to maintain, when they acted by a Commission from a Sovereign Prince, that was an Enemy. And if they shall cruize upon our Coasts with a design to take, or destroy any of the King's, or his Subjects Ships, they are Enemies, though they were the Subjects of a Prince, or State in Amity with the King of England. But at this time there is no necessity of entering upon this Question, because it is proved that divers, who were on Board this Vessel were French Men, the joining with whom, in Prosecution of such a Design, is that kind of High-Treason of adhering to the King's Enemies. So that if Captain Vaughan was a Subject of England, he is proved Guilty of High-Treason, if you believe the Evidence.  
But now it is insisted on by Mr. Vaughan and his Council, That though he was exercising Hostility against the King of England, and designing Mischief to his Subjects; yet, says he, I was not a Subject of England, I was born a Subject to the French King. If that be true, then is he not Guilty of High-Treason; he is an Enemy, but not a Traitor: And that is the Point you are now to consider of, Whether he be a Subject of England, or France?  
Now as to that, he being taken under such Circumstances, and speaking English, it is reasonable to be presumed that he is a Subject of England, unless he proves the contrary. But than you have heard by several of the Witnesses, That when he was at first taken, he acknowledged himself to be an Irish Man; and he did not only acknowledge it to them that assisted in apprehending him, but being carried to Dover, when the Marshal entered him in his Book as a Prisoner, he entered him not as a French Man, but declared at that time he was an Irish Man. It may be he did not consider the Consequence of it, for the next Day he was carried before the Mayor of Dover, and then having considered better of it, that it was not for his Interest to acknowledge himself an Irish, Man he said he was born a Subject to the French King, and at Martinico. There were Scotch Men and Irish Men taken at the same time, and they were entered as of the Nation they belonged to, and so were divers entered as French Men. So that unless he hath given sufficient Evidence to the contrary, this is sufficient to induce you to believe him an Irish Man born.  
But he has endeavoured to take off this Evidence that has been given. First, he says, It was when he was in Drink that he did confess himself to be an Irish Man; but when he was Sober, he said he was a French Man. And besides that he calls a Witness, whose Name is Robert French, to give an account of him. And French says, That about fourteen Years ago he was at St. Christopher's, on French Ground, and he did then see this Thomas Vaughan, he did take him then to be about the Age of fifteen. He says he stayed there about four and twenty Hours, and that he was in the Company of this Vaughan and his Father about five or six Hours. He says his Father told him at that time, that this young Man, who was then about fifteen Years of Age, was born at Martinico. He says further, That his Father did recommend this Son to him to be a Seafaring Man, being the Employment he intended him for; and he is sure this is the Man. This Robert French was asked, Whether he ever saw this Vaughan from the time he first saw him at St. Christopher's until this time? He says he never saw him since that time, till about two Months ago. He gives you this account how he came to meet with him; he says he came to Town, and being a Charitable man, he used to visit the Prisons; and he came to Newgate to one Knowler, and there he saw Captain Vaughan; and though he had not seen him for fourteen Years before, yet he knew him again, and is positive that he is the same Person.  
Another Swears he knew the Prisoner about five years, and he was reputed a French man.  
There has been another Witness produced which is that Dascine, who came up as a French man, and talked French, pretending he could not speak English; but on Examination it was discovered that he had an Employment in England, and was a Bayliffs-Follower, and it appears he can speak English very well; and notwithstanding his pretence has given his Evidence in English. And he tells you, That he about the year 1669 did go to St. Christopher's, and afterwards to Martinico, and there he went to one Williams, who had a Friend whose name was Vaughan, at whose House there was a Christening to be of his Son, to whom Williams was to be Godfather; and this Witness was carried thither, and the Child was Christened Thomas. He tells you he went over again to St. Christopher's, and to Martinico in the year 1677, and that then he enquired for this Child, and did see him. Then he says, after that, he went over again to St. Christopher's and to Martinico about thirteen years ago, and then saw him again, and, I think, never saw him since until very lately; and this Prisoner he undertakes to tell you is the very Person.  
But then one Harvey tells you he saw him in France in the year 1693, and there he was taken to be a French man, and he lived with a Woman that sold Silk that said he was her Nephew, her Sister's Son, and that he was born at Martinico: This is the Evidence he gives you to induce you to believe he is a French man.  
Now in the first place, before I open the Evidence in answer to it, I desire you to observe the Weight and Import of this Evidence that hath been produced by the Prisoner. First, for this French that says he saw Captain Vaughan fourteen years ago, when he was about fifteen years of Age; he had no former Acquaintance with him, stayed in his Company but six Hours, and came away within four and twenty Hours after his first arrival, and never saw him again in fourteen years; it is a strange thing that he should know him again so well as to be so positive that he is the same Person, for in fourteen years there is a great alteration in a man: For a man that has known one at the Age of fifteen, and not seen him in seven years after, though before he was very well acquainted with him, cannot so easily know him again. But however he is positive, upon his Oath, that he is the same Person that he saw at Martinico.  
Then as for Dascine, you may consider him that he should take notice of a little Child that he saw Christened several years before, and that he should now remember him when he had not seen him in thirteen years; sure he had a great liking to this Child, that when he went to Martinico many years after he should be so inquisitive after him; I must leave these things to you to consider of: That he might have an Aunt in France that is very possible too.  
But now consider how this Evidence hath been endeavoured to be answered; two Witnesses have been produced to contradict that which they have Sworn. The first is David Cray, who tells you he has known the Prisoner for two years, and says he was always reputed to be an Irish man, and born in Galloway; he has often discoursed with him about his Country, and he told him that he was an Irish man, and born at Galloway. Then you hear what a Letter is produced writ to Cray when he was to come upon his Trial, he mentions what his Defence was, and that it was impossible that any could do him any harm but he and two more. Cray Swears it is his Hand; that he hath seen him write, and he believes it is his Hand.  
Then there is a Gentleman, Mr. Rivet, that came here by chance, who is a Galloway man, he saith he knew the Prisoner's Father, who was reputed to come thither about the time of the Rebellion in Ireland, in 1641. and lived at Galloway, and that this Prisoner, Mr. Vaughan, was his Son, and he knew him of a Child, was well acquainted with him, lived hard by him, remembers him an Apprentice in Galloway, and tells you to whom, and says he is sure this is the very man; and that he saw the Prisoner in 1691, about the time of the Reduction of Galloway; and he is confident that the Prisoner is the Son of John Vaughan at Galloway; and he gives you a particular account of him and his Family; viz. of the Reputation and Manner of living of his Father, and what other Brothers he had; so that there is no Objection against his Credit, and it is hard to believe, since he is so positive and circumstantial, that he can be mistaken.  
But the Prisoner and his Council have endeavoured to answer all this Evidence; and first they have called Cray's Brother to prove that he is an ill man, for that he came into this Town where his Brother lives, who subsisted him and took him to his House, and one day when he and his Wife went abroad, he made bold with some of his Money; but they thought the Maid had it, and he charged her with it, but to his Satisfaction it did afterwards appear that David had it.  
Then there is another, Christopher Hyden, Christopher Cray's Servant, who says he, heard D. Cray say he was forced to be an Evidence against Vaughan to save himself; and that he used to threaten his Brother, that if he would not give him more Money he would swear against him. Bryan saith much to the same purpose. These are produced to take off the Credit of D. Cray's Testimony.  
But than Gentlemen, as to the place of the Prisoner's birth, two other Witnesses are produced to give you Satisfaction that this Capt. Vaughan was not the Son of that Mr. Wughan of Galloway, whose Evidence I will open to you, and then you will see how coherent they are in their Testimony. The first is Creighton, a Shoemaker, he says he knew Thomas Vaughan, the Son of John Vaughan of Galloway, about ten years since; he was a Galloway man bred, and lived the next door to John Vaughan that had a Son Thomas. He says he has been here about ten years in England. He says he thinks that Thomas Vaughan, the Son of John Vaughan, was about the Age of fifteen years, but that this Prisoner is not he, for that Thomas Vaughan was disfigured with the Smallpox; he remembered him well, he had reason for it, for he once basted him sound, and that he went away from Galloway when he was about fifteen years of Age, and was reported to be dead; and if it were so this Prisoner cannot be the Person.  
The other Witness is as positive as Creighton, for he saith, He knew this John Vaughan of Galloway, and his Son Thomas; and that Thomas Vaughan, Son of John Vaughan, died about ten years since of the Smallpox. So that they have found two Thomas Vaughan's; one tells you of one that was fifteen years old, and was disfigured with the Smallpox; and the other tells you of Thomas Vaughan, who died of the Smallpox when he was ten years of Age.  
You are therefore to consider the Evidence on both sides. The Question principally is, Whether the Prisoner be a Subject of the King of England? If you are satisfied that he is not an English Subject, but a French man, than he is not Guilty of this High-Treason; but if you are satisfied, by the series of the whole Evidence, that he is an Irish man, and that he had a Commission from the French King, and that he cruized upon our English Coasts, in Company with the King's Enemies, with a design to take, burn, or destroy any of the King's or his Subjects Ships, you are to find him Guilty of High-Treason whereof he stands Indicted, otherwise you are to acquit him.  Cl. of. Arr. 
Swear an Officer to keep the Jury; which was done. After a short stay, the Jury returned into Court, and gave in their Verdict.  Cl. of. Arr. 
Gentlemen, answer to your Names. E. Leeds.  Mr. Leeds. 
Here.  Cryer. 
Vous avez, and so of the rest.  Cl. of. Arr. 
Gentlemen, Are you all agreed of your Verdict?  Jury. 
Yes.  Cl. of. Arr. 
Who shall say for you?  Jury. 
Our Foreman.  Cl. of. Arr. 
Thomas Vaughan, hold up thy Hand. (Which he did.) Look upon the Prisoner. How say you, Is he Guilty of the High-Treason whereof he stands Indicted, or not Guilty?  Foreman. 
Guilty.  Cl. of. Arr. 
What Goods or Chattels, Lands or Tenements had he at the time of the Treason committed.  Foreman. 
None to our knowledge.  Cl. of. Arr. 
Then harken to your Verdict as the Court hath Recorded it: You say that Thomas Vaughan is Guilty of the High-Treason whereof he stands  
Indicted, but that he had no Goods or Chattels, Lands or Tenements at the time of the High-Treason committed, or at any time since to your knowledge, and so you say all.  Jury. 
Yes.  Tho. Vaughan. 
My Lord, let me beg one Favour, that I may be used like a Gentleman, that I may be sent to a Chamber, and not to a Dungeon, and that my Friends may come to me.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Captain Vaughan, they say you once made an escape, and therefore the Keeper must keep you with Humanity, but with all Security.  Tho. Vaughan. 
I desire that I may be kept like a Christian.  L. C. J. Holt. 
The Keeper must do his Duty.  Cl. of Arr. 
Thomas Vaughan, hold up thy Hand, (which he did) Thou standest Convicted of High-Treason against our Sovereign Lord the King: What hast thou to say for thyself why Judgement should not pass against thee to die according to the Law?  Tho. Vaughan. 
I am altogether a Stranger to the Law, my Lord, I refer myself to my Council.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Well, than you refer yourself to your Council. You have had a fair Trial, and have no reason to complain of it: If your Council have any thing to say in arrest of Judgement they shall be heard.  Mr. Phipps. 
My Lord, the Indictment has two sorts of Treason laid in it; the one for adhering to the King's Enemies, the other levying of War; and, with submission, I take it that the first is not well laid, for it says that the Prisoner did adhere to the King's Enemies, but says not against the King. Now every body knows that the French King is in War, not only with England but Holland, and Spain, and the Emperor: But if a Man join with the French against any of them, he adheres to the King's Enemies, and yet it cannot be said to be against the King; therefore they ought to have laid it that he did adhere to the King's Enemies contra Dominum Regem; it must be aiding and comforting them against the King that makes the Treason.  L. C. J. Holt. 
It does say so.  Mr. Phipps. 
No, my Lord, it only says that Captain Vaughan did adhere to the King's Enemies, and does not say it was against the King; and if that be Treason, is what we desire to know.  L. C. J. Holt. 
If he adhere to the King's Enemies, it must be against the King, though he assist them only against the King's Allies, for thereby the King's Enemies may be more encouraged and enabled to do Mischief or Damage to the King: Suppose you assist the French King against the King of Spain, that is now in Alliance and League with the King of England, and the French in actual Enmity, that is to adhere to the King's Enemies against the King.  Mr. Phipps. 
Would that be Treason my Lord?  L. C. J. Holt 
Yes certainly, though that is not a point in this Case, and so not necessary to be determined now; for the Act of Parliament of 25 of E. 3. defines Treason in adhering to the King's Enemies, and expresses the Overt-Act in giving them aid or comfort; it is sufficient to allege the Treason in the Words of the Statute, adhering to the King's Enemies. An Overt-Act alleged, shows it to be against the King; and in pursuance of that adherence he did so and so; he was a Captain and Soldier in the Ship, did join with the King's Enemies, etc. with a design to destroy the King's and his Subjects Ships; surely that is most manifest an adherence to the King's Enemies against the King.  Mr. Phipps. 
The Overt-Act, if it were alleged sufficiently, would not help it; for if there can be an adhering to the King's Enemies that is not Treason, they ought to allege such adhering as is Treason; and if the Treason itself is not well alleged, the Overt-Act will not help it.  L. C. J. Holt. 
There is an Overt-Act to show it to be against the King. It is said all along, he being in this Vessel Clancarty, cum diversis Subditis.  Mr. Phipps 
But then that Overt-Act is not well alleged, for 'tis said only he went a cruizing; whereas they ought to have alleged that he did commit some Acts of Hostility, and attempted to take some of the King's Ships; for cruizing alone cannot be an Overt-Act, for he might be cruizing to secure the French Merchant Ships from being taken, or for many other purposes, which will not be an Overact of Treason.  L. C. J. Holt. 
I beg your Pardon. Suppose the French King, with Forces, should come to Dunkirk with a design to invade England, if any one should send him Victuals, or give him Intelligence, or by any other way contribute to their Assistance, it would be High-Treason in adhering to the King's Enemies.  Mr. Phipps. 
If the French King had designed an Invasion upon England, and Captain Vaughan had assisted in his Vessel in forwarding the Invasion, it would have been Treason; but here is nothing mentioned but cruizing.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Cruizing about the Coast of England with a design to destroy the King's Ship.  Mr. Phipps. 
That design ought to be made appear by some Act of Hostility, for in the Case of Burton and Bradshaw, and others, which my Lord Coke citys, the agreeing to rise and pull down enclosures, and meeting and providing Arms for that purpose, is agreed not to be levying of War; and they were indicted for Conspiring to levy War upon the Statute of Queen Eliz. And in this Case, here being only a Conspiring, and nothing attempted, it can be no more Treason than it was in that Case.  L. C. J. Holt. 
When Men form themselves into a Body, and march Rank and File with Weapons offensive and defensive, this is levying of War with open Force, if the design be Public. Do you think when a Ship is armed with Guns, etc. doth appear on the Coast, watching an opportunity to burn the King's Ships in the Harbour, and their design be known, and one goes to them, and aids and assists them; That this is not an adhering to the King's Enemies? Here are two Indictments, one for levying War, and the other for adhering to the King's Enemies; but the adhering to the King's Enemies is prinncipally insisted on, and there must be an actual War proved upon the Person Indicted in the one, yet need not be proved in the other Case.  Mr. Phipps. 
The same certainly is necessary in one as well as the other; for barely adhering to the King's Enemies is not Treason, but there must be an actual Aiding and Comforting them; and a mere intention to assist the King's Enemies, is not an adherence within the Statute of 25 Ed. 3.  L. C. J. Holt. 
If there be not High-Treason in the Act alleged, that is, if it do not make out an adherence to the King's Enemies, than your Objection would hold good.  Mr. Phipps. 
The going to cruize, my Lord, does not make out an adherence to the King's Enemies; for his cruizing may be for other purposes as well as to take the King's Ships, and your Lordship will intend the best in favour of Life.  Mr. Whitaker. 
To burn the King's Ships.  L. C. J. Treby. 
The Indictment is laid for Adhering to, and Comforting and Aiding the King's Enemies. You would take that to be capable to be construed adhering to the King's Enemies in other respects; but I take it to be a reasonable Construction of the Indictment, to be adhering to the King's Enemies in their Enmity. What is the Duty of every Subject? It is to sight with, and subdue, and weaken the King's Enemies: And contrary to this, if he Confederate with, and Strengthen the King's Enemies, he expressly contradicts this Duty of his Allegiance, and is Guilty of this Treason of adhering to them. But than you say here is no aiding, unless there were something done, some Act of Hostility. Now here is going a Board with an intention to do such Acts; And is not that Comforting and Aiding? Certainly it is: Is not the French King comforted and aided, when he has got so many English Subjects to go a cruizing upon our Ships? Suppose they Man his whole Fleet, or a considerable part of it; Is not that aiding? If they go and enter themselves into a Regiment, List themselves and March, though they do not come to a Battle, this is helping and encouraging; such things give the Enemy Heart and Courage to go on with the War; or else, it may be, the French King would come to good Terms of Peace. It is certainly Aiding and Comforting of them, to go and accept a Commission, and enter into their Ships of War, and List themselves, and go out in order to destroy their Fellow-Subjects, and ruin the King's Ships; these are Actings of an Hostile nature. And it this be not adhering, etc. it may as well be said, That if the same Persons had made an attack upon our Ships and miscarried in it, that had not been so neither, because that in an unprosperous attempt there is nothing done that gives aid or comfort to the Enemy. And after this kind of Reasoning they will not be Guilty, till they have Success; and if they have Success enough, it will be too late to question them.  Mr. Phipps. 
Intending to levy War is not Treason, unless a War be actually levied.  L. C. J. Treby. 
Is it not actual levying of War, if they actually provide Arms, and levy Men, and in a Warlike manner set out and cruize, and come with a design to destroy our Ships?  Mr. Phipps. 
It would not be an actual levying of War, unless they commit some Act of Hostility.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Yes, indeed, the going on Board, and being in a posture to attack the King's Ships. As to the fault you find with the Indictment, there is a fault, but not in point of Law; they might have laid it more generally, so as to have given more Evidence.  Mr. Bar. Powis. 
However it is well enough.  
But for you to say, because they did not actually fight, it is not a levying of War; Is it not plain what they did intend? That they came with that intention, that they came in that Posture, that they came Armed, and had Guns, and Blunderbusies, and surrounded the Ship twice, they came with an armed Force; that is a strong Evidence of the design.  L. C. J. Holt. 
You would make no Act to be aiding and assisting but fight.  Mr. Phipps. 
Then next I am in your Lordship's Judgement, whether the Statute of 28 of Hen. the 8 th'. by which Captain Vaughan is tried, is in force, and be not repealed by the first and second of Philip and Mary, which saith, that all Trials, in Cases of Treason, shall be at the Common-Law. Now by the Common-Law before the Statute 28 Hen. 8. Treason done upon the Sea, was tried before the Admiral, or his Lieutenant, and my Lord Coke in the 12 Rep. in the Case of the Admiralty, saith the Jurisdiction of the Admiralty is by the Common-Law. By the Statute 33 Hen. 8. Treason confessed before three of the Privy-Council might be tried in a foreign County, but that Statute is repealed by the Statute 1 and 2 of Philip and Mary; for by the Statute 33 Hen. 8. c. 4. Treason committed in trales, might be tried in what County the King would assign; but since the Statute of Philip and Mary, it must be in the proper County; so that we are in your Lordship's Judgement, whether the Statute of 28 Hen. 8. be in force; and whether, since the Statute of 1 and 2 Philip and Mary, Treasons done upon the Sea, ought not to be tried before the Admirals, or anciently at the Common-Law?  L. C. J. Holt. 
This is Treason by the Common Law, and the Trial is by the Method of the Common-Law.  Mr. Phipps. 
'Tis true that my Lord Coke, and other Authorities say, That the Statute 35 Hen. 8. for trying Treasons committed beyond Sea, is not repealed by the Statute of 1 and 2 Philip and Mary, but they do not say that this Statute is not repealed by the Statute of Philip and Mary; and the Books being silent in this, is the reason why I propose this Question for your Lordship's judgement.  L. C. J. Holt. 
It is no more a Question than the Trials of foreign Treason, and then the Determination of the Trials upon the 35 th'. determines the Question upon this.  Dr. Oldys. 
We must have two Witnesses by the Rules of the Civil-Law, an extrajudicial saying of a Party may be retracted by them at any time, that is the Civil-Law, and so there can be out one Witness.  L. C. J. Holt. 
That is not the Law of England.  Dr. Oldys. 
I do humbly conceive that the Civil-Law is not taken away in this Case; for though the Statute prescribes the form of Proceedings according to the Rules of the Common-Law, yet as to the Crimes and Proofs the Civil-Law is still in force, and then the Party may retract his Confession in Judgement, much more any extrajudicial saying.  Mr. Whitaker. 
You are arraigning the Verdict.  L. C. J. Holt. 
That you should have taken notice of before the Verdict was given. But we think there is no danger in hearing this Objection, because it is so easily answered. How many Witnesses were to the Confession?  Sir Ch. Hedges. 
We are not in a Court that proceeds according to the strict Rules of the Civil-Law; but if we were, that Law is not so absurd as to allow that a Party may retract his Confession at any time, so as to make it have no effect.  Dr. Oldys. 
There must be two Witnesses at any time.  Sir Ch. Hedges. 
So there are here to the Confession; but you mistake if you think that every particular is to be proved strictly as the Civil Law requires, for the end of the Statute which directs the Proceedings of this Court was to facilitate the Method of making Proofs, that being sound difficult by the course of the Civil-Law; and therefore was that Statute made, as plainly appears, by the Preamble thereof.  Dr. Oldys. 
There is a new Statute that revives that Statute again, and that requires two Witnesses; whereby 'tis reduced to the Rules of the Civil-Law again.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Two Witnesses there must be; but then consider it is not necessary to have two to every individual Overt-Act: For suppose there be two Overt-Act laid in the Indictments, for one species of Treason, Compassing and Imagining the Death of the King; if there be one Witness that he bought a Dagger, and said he would kill the King, and he is seen, it may be, going to the King's Bedchamber with the Dagger; another Witness says, he said he would kill the King with a Pistol, and bought a Pistol, and he stood waiting to kill the King as he came by; that is another Overt-Act of the same Treason. If one Witness prove one, and another Witness prove the other, this is sufficient Proof with us.  Dr. Oldys. 
It is another Question, Whether he be a Subject?  L. C. J. Holt. 
That is not an Overt-Act; if there be one Witness to that, it is enough, there needs not two Witnesses to prove him a Subject; but upon the Trial there were above two Witnesses to prove it: There was Crittenden, the Marshal of Dover, Cray and Rivet. I must tell you, as to the Doctrine of the Civil-Law, it is not universally received in all Countries; it is received in several Countries as they find it Convenient, and not as Obligatory in itself.  Dr. Oldys. 
Yes, in all places, as to Proof; for 'tis the Law of God and Nations, Ex ore duorum, vel trium, etc. And one Witness is no Witness.  Sir Ch. Hedges. 
Two Witnesses may be necessary to convict a Man of any capital Crime, but than it doth not follow that there must be two Witnesses to prove every particular Fact and Circumstance. In this point, touching the Place of the Nativity of Thomas Vaughan, Was there not sufficient in his own Confession, together with the other Proofs on the King's behalf, to throw the burden of Proof upon the Prisoner? You yourselves seem to have been of that Opinion; you undertook to prove it, and 'tis you that have failed in that particular.  L. C. J. Holt. 
Our Trials by Juries are of such Consideration in our Law, that we allow their Determination to be the best, and most advantageous to the Subject, and therefore less Evidence is required than by the Civil-Law. So said Fortescue in his Commendation of the Laws of England.  Dr. Oldys. 
Because the Jury are the Witnesses in reality, according to the Laws of England, being presumed to be ex vicineto; but when it is on the High and Open Seas, they are not then presumed to be ex vicineto, and so must be instructed according to the Rules of the Civil-Law by Witnesses.  Mr. Bar. Powis. 
This is not a Trial by the Civil-Law; for that Statute was made to avoid the Niceties of your Law.  Mr. J. Eyers. 
He is tried with like Evidence, as in other Cases of High-Treason.  Dr. Oldys. 
No, the late Act requires two Witnesses:  Cl. of Arr. 
Make Proclamation of silence.  Cryer. 
All manner of Persons are Commanded to keep silence, while Judgement is giving, upon pain of Imprisonment.  
And then Judgement was given, according as the Law directs in Cases of High-Treason   

An Abstract of the Trial of John Murphey for High-Treason, etc.  
John Murphey being Indicted for High-Treason, the Twelve Gentlemen following were sworn upon the Jury for his Trial.  

Nathaniel Long  
John Ewer  
John Child  
Thomas Clerk  
Thomas Batem●n  
Henry Try  
John Morewood  
Nicholas Greenway  
Samuel Jackson  
John Hall  
John Column  
Roger Mott.   
Then Mr. Whitaker, one of the King's Council, opened the Indictment; after which Dr. Nuton, one of the King's Advocates, spoke as follows.  
JOhn Murphey of Cork, in the Kingdom of Ireland, born a Subject of this Kingdom, and therefore owing Allegiance and Service to his King and Country, stands Indicted for Adhering to, Aiding and Comforting His Majesty's Enemies; and likewise for levying of War, in Assisting the French King, the Greatest, the most Inveterate, and the most Dangerous Enemy of our King, our Nation, our Religion, and the common Liberty of Europe, in an Unjust, Cruel, and long War, against his King and Country; that King who Heads the League against the common Oppressor of Christendom, and the Country whose Forces and Reputation support that League; and this with a design only to rob and spoil, which is the Meanest part of the War, but withal the most Mischievous to the Innocent and Trading Subjects; being on Board a French Privateer, called, The Nostre Dame de bon Novelle, and Fight in her; for though the coming with such a design, and the being in a Vessel, under a French Commission, was Criminal, and must have met with, since it deserved the same Punishment; yet this was put in Execution too, by the the Taking the Joseph and Isaac of London, on the Twentieth of March last, to the Terror and the Impoverishment of many of his Fellow-Subjects; which justifies their Complaint, and this public Prosecution of the State, for the bringing him to Justice.  
And then the Witnesses for the King were called, and being Examined, together with several others, on the behalf of the Prisoner, it appeared to the Jury that the said Murphey, being an Irish Man, and his Majesty's Subject, did Traitorously adhere unto, and assist the French King in a French Ship, called, The Nostre Dame de bon Novelle, and in Taking and Securing therewith a Ship, called, The Joseph and Isaac of London, belonging to English Subjects. And thereupon he was found Guilty, and received Sentence of Death, as in Cases of High-Treason.   

THE COMMISSION OF Capt. Tho. Vaughan, Which he had by Order of the FRENCH KING.  

LEWIS ALEXANDER of Bourbon, Earl of Toulouse, Duke of Amville, Commander of the King's Orders, Governor and Lieutenant-General for His Majesty in the Province of Brittany, Peer and Admiral of France. To all those who shall see these present Letters Greeting; The King having Declared War against His Catholic Majesty, the Favourers of the of the Crowns of England and Scotland, and the Estates of the United Provinces, for the Reasons contained in the Declarations Published by His Majesty throughout the Extent of His Kingdom, Countries, Lands and Lordships under His Obedience; and His Majesty having Commanded Us to take care that the said Declarations be observed, in what doth depend upon the Power and Authority which His Majesty hath been pleased to commit to Our said Charge of Admiral. We have according to the express Orders of His said Majesty, given Leave, Power and Permission to THOMAS VAUGHAN, living at Boulogne, to arm and set forth in Warlike Manner a Bark, called, The Loyal Clencarty of the Burden of Ten Tuns, or thereabouts, which is at present in the Port of Boulogne, with such Number of Men, Cannons, Bullets, Powder, Shot, and other Ammunitions of War, and Provisions which are Necessary to set her out to Sea, in a Condition to sail and cruize upon the Pirates, and others without Commission, as also upon the Subjects of His Catholic Majesty, the Estates of the United Provinces, the Favourers of the of the Crowns of England and Scotland, and other Enemies of this Estate, in what Places soever he can meet them, whether it be upon the Coasts of their Country, in their Ports, or Rivers, also upon their Shores, or Places where the said Captain THOMAS VAUGHAN shall think fit to land to annoy the said Enemies; and there to make use of all the Means and Arts permitted, and used by the Laws of War, to take them and bring them Prisoners with their Ships, Arms, and other Things in their Possession.  
Provided the said VAUGHAN shall keep, and cause those of his Crew to keep the Maritime Orders, and that he shall carry, during his Voyage, the Flag and Ensign of the King's Arms and of Ours, and cause the present Commission to be Registered in the Registry of the nearest Admiralty where he shall be Equipped, and leave there a Roll Signed and Certified by him, containing the Names and Surnames, the Births and Residence of his Crew; and make his return to the said Place, or some other Port of France, and make his Report before the Officers of the Admiralty, and no others, of what shall have happened during his Voyage, and give Us Advice thereof, and send his said Report to the Secretary-General of the Marine, with the Papers justifying the same, that We may give such Orders thereupon as may be Necessary.  
And We pray and require all Kings, Princes, Potentates, Sovereigns, Estates, Republics, Friends and Allies of this Crown, and all others, to whom it shall appertain, to give the said VAUGHAN all favour, aid, assistance and succour in their Ports, with his said Vessel, Company and Prizes, which he shall take during his Voyage, without doing, or suffering to be done to him any Trouble or Hindrance; offering to do the like when We shall be by them thereunto required.  
And We do command and require all Marine Officers, and others, to whom it shall appertain, to let him safely and freely pass with his said Vessel, Arms and Company, and the Prizes which he shall take, without doing, or suffering to be done to him any Trouble or Hindrance; but on the contrary, to give him all succour and assistance that shall be Necessary. These Presents to be of no force after one Year, from the Day of the date hereof.  
In Witness whereof We have Signed these Presents, and caused them to be Sealed with the Seal of Our Arms, and Counter-signed by the Secretary-General of the Marine, at Versailles the tenth Day of the Month of July, One thousand six hundred ninety five.  L. A. de Bourbon. L. S.  

By my Lord De Vallencour.  
The present Commission was Registered in the Registry of the Admiralty of Boulogne, after having been seen by us James Abot de la Cocherine, the King's Councillor, deputed to the Intendancy of Boulogne, Exercising the Charge of Lieutenant-General of the Admiralty, in the presence of the King's Proctor, at the request of the said Captain Vaughan, being present, whom we have permitted to sail and cruize upon the Enemies of the Estate. Done at Boulogne the fourteenth of July, One thousand six hundred ninety five.  
Maginon.   

Versionem hanc Anglicanam in omnibus, cum suo Originali Gallico convenire testor,  
Wilihelmus Rocke, Notar. Publ.    

A Catalogue of Books printed for and sold by John Everingham at the Star in Ludgate-Street.  
A Debate on the Justice and Piety of the present Constitution: under King William. In Two Parts. The first relating to the State, the Second to the Church. Between Eucheres a Conformist, and Dyscheres a Recusant. By Samuel ●●ll, Rector of Kilmington, Author of Solomon and 〈◊〉  
The Trials of Joseph Dawson, Edward Forseith, William May, William Bishop, Jame● Lewis, and John Sparks: For several Piracies and Robberies by them committed, 〈◊〉 the Company of Every the Grand Pirate, near the Coasts of the East-Indies, and several other places on the Seas. Giving an Account of their Villainous Robberies and Barbarities.  
Eight Sermons preached on several Occasions. By Nathaniel Whaley Rector of Broughton in Northamptonshire.  
A New Family-Book: Or the True Interest of Families. Being Directions to Parents and Children, and to those who are instead of Parents; showing them their several Duties, and how they may be happy in one another. Together with several Prayers for Families and Children, and Graces before and after Meat. To which is annexed a 〈◊〉 course about the right way of improving our Time. By James Kirkwood, Rector o● Astwick in Bedfordshire. With a Preface by Dr. Horneck.  
The Guide of a Christian, directing him to such things as are by him to be believ●● practised, and hoped for. There are added at the End, Prayers to be used upon several Occasions.  
Moral Maxims and Reflections. In Four Parts. Written in French by the Duke ●● Rochefoucault. Now made English.  
Letters on several Subjects, by the late pious Dr. Henry More. With several o●●●● Letters. To which is added by the Publisher, two Letters, one to the Reverend 〈◊〉 Sh●rlock, Dean of St. Paul's; and the other to the Reverend Mr. Bentley. With other Discourses. Published by the Reverend Mr. E. Elys.  
A Practical Discourse concerning the Redeeming of Time. By Edward Pelling, 〈◊〉 Chaplain in Ordinary to Their Majesties, and Rector of Petworth in Sussex.  
The True Royal English School, for His Majesty's Three Kingdoms. Being a Catalogue of all the Words in the Bible, together with a P●●●●●es in Prose and Verse, 〈◊〉 variety of Pictures, etc. together with an Exposition on the Creed. By Tobias, 〈◊〉 late Minister of the Gospel.  
The Gauger and Measurer's Companion: Being a compendious way of Gauging per●●●●●● and Solids, etc. Also a brief Description of the Gage Point for Ale and W●●● Gallons, etc. To which is added a true Method for brewing strong Ale in London, 〈◊〉 With thirty Cuts. By James Lightbody, Philomath. Price 1 s. 6 d.  
FINIS.