A VINDICATION OF THE HISTORY OF THE Gunpowder Treason. And of the Proceedings and Matters relating thereunto, from the Exceptions which have been made against it, And more especially of late years by the Author of the Catholic Apology, and Others. To which is added, A PARALLEL betwixt That and the Present Popish Plot.  
LONDON, Printed by J. D. for Richard Chiswell, at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Churchyard, 1681.   


Erratas in the History of the Gunpowder-Treason.  
PAge 8.1. ult. for 20 read 16. After p. 20, false paged. P. 28. l. 23. r. Catesby. P. 30. l. 19 f. Everard, r. Gerard; f. when, r. where. P. 31. l. 12. expunge that.   

In the Vindication.  
Page 17. lin. 4. read reserve. P. 32. Marg. l. 2. r. 9 P. 36. Marg. l. 14. r. 313. P. 40. Marg. f. ibid. r. Antilog. p. 146. P. 47. Marg. deal l. ult. P. 48. Marg. deal l. 9 P. 54. l. 1. r. Wykes. P. 55. l. 18. r. Conjurationis. P. 57 l. ult. f. yet r. that. Marg. deal Paper 418. P. 60. Marg. f. ibid. r. Proceeds. P. 61. Marg. l. 8. r. 248, P. 63. l. 20. r. 338.    

To the Reader.  
IN compiling the History of the Gunpowder-Treason, published two Years since, I had a particular respect to Brevity and Truth, that I might neither burden nor abuse the Reader. How far I attained the former, the Book itself doth show; and that I might not mistake in the latter, I did with good heed and diligence consult not only the Histories foreign and domestic, but also all other Books which I could meet with, written pro and con upon that subject. But all this while I had neither seen nor heard of the large Reply in Vindication of the Catholic Apology, written by a Person of as great Wit as Honour; in which I afterwards found there was a particular Discourse upon this Argument. I must confess that the Honourable Author hath as well acquitted himself as could be expected in a Case of this nature, and by the reviving and skilful disposing of what hath been said by others, and starting many things not taken notice of, that I know of, before, hath put a pretty Varnish upon the Cause, and made it passable with inconsiderate Persons. But if what is there said be warily viewed, I do not question, but it will appear to be founded rather upon conjecture, than solid History, and to have more of fancy than truth in it. But whether this be so or not, or whether what I have here said will make it evident or no, I must now leave to the Judicious and such as will be concerned impartially to inquire into the merits of the Cause. If it should be expected that I should have taken notice of some other late Books of our Adversaries that touch upon this Subject, I have only this to say, that I have not willingly overlooked any; and as for those that I have seen, I find little or nothing which is not the same with what is said in the foresaid Reply, and that hath not for the most part been borrowed from it.   

THE HISTORY OF THE Gunpowder-Treason VINDICATED.  

THE Conspiracy of the Gunpowder-Treason, carried in its front, so much of unnatural cruelty, that with all their Art the Party could put no colour upon it: and therefore there hath been nothing wanting amongst them to vindicate themselves and their Religion from being concerned in it. Sometimes they will slander Authority, and make the Judges and Council to Conspire against them. Sometimes the whole was the contrivance of a Minister of State. Sometimes the Traitors were but very few, and they such as were young and rash, quick to resent a provocation, and easily inclined to revenge it. Sometimes it was in those discontent, & not Religion. And if any or all of these will serve to stop the mouths of their Adversaries and protect themselves, they will boldly stand up in their own vindication; And that they have reason to say all this, is what they do maintain. I shall therefore consider their several pleas, and do think that I shall take in all that they say, and show it to be very weak and insufficient, if I make good, 

1. That this was a Plot of their own, and not contrived to their hands by their Adversaries,  
2. That more were concerned in it, than were at that time publicly known and accused.  
3. That those that fled and suffered for it were really guilty.  
4. That this Conspiracy was purely upon the account of Religion.  
5. I shall add, that they never yet gave to the world any real and good satisfaction of their abhorrency of it.    
Of what great use it will be, if they could prove the whole to be another's device, I cannot well understand. For if it could be made as clear as the day that a Minister of State drew the Conspirators into the noose, and had such as from time to time did give him intelligence how their affair stood, will it serve to clear their innocency, and make the Plot on their part to be none? was there all the while no evil inclination of their own to work upon, and no mischief intended by them? were they drawn in without their consent? or were they not drawn in at all, but the whole accusation a Fiction, and it no better than a seeming Plot, 
Catholick-Apology with reply. p 404.  as one suggests? If not, why is this so vigorously urged, and so much enlarged upon by our late Apologists? But yet how little shadow of proof there is for this, will appear if we consider how inconstantly these speak as to this matter. 
p. 412.  For if we will hearken to the man of 70 years when he died (who is for that reason presumed to be a person of some credit in the case by the honourable Author above said) he saith, 
Mori ●ist, prov. p. 310.  Fuit non levis suspitio, etc. that there was no light suspicion of a certain Peers being acquainted with the Conspiracy long before its discovery, who cunningly pretended ignorance that the more might be involved in it. It was in his time (it seems) a suspicion, and a suspicion that that Nobleman knew of the Conspiracy, i.e. by the intelligence he kept with some of them. But in the current of ten or twelve years, from a suspicion it comes to a certainty; from his being privy to it, it comes to be his proper Invention. For now it's said to be set a work by the discoverers; to be a trick invented by the Statesman, 
Apol. p. 403, 404. p. 538.  and to be a seeming Plot; and that they were drawn into it by the dexterity of a Protestant. It was in More's time some Noble man thus was suspected, but now upon the sole credit of Mr. Osborn, it must be the Treasurer (meaning I believe Cecil, though at the time of this Treason he was Secretary only) and he for his good service was made an Earl, as our Author saith; although as luck would have it, 
Apol. p. 411. Baker's Chr. An. 1605.  he was so created on the Saturday after St. George's day, Ann. 1605, which was above six months before this Treason broke out.  
So inconsistent are Persons with themselves, when they have not truth on their side; and so apt are they to catch at any little thing, when they serve a Cause or a Party.  
For is it not an easy thing to raise such a report, and have we not reason to believe such will do it, whose interest it is to discharge themselves of it, and who as they would deny it if they could, so would to be sure extenuat it when it is not to be denied? Can we think that they who contrived to cast the whole upon the Puritans, 
Wilson great Brit. p. 32.  if it had succeeded, were not as able and willing when it miscarried to place the name of Cecil in their Register, as the Master-workman (as the above said Author saith that Sanderson doth acknowledge) and to make him the deviser of it? 
p. 412.  Furthermore is it not usual for such as would be accounted Men of Wit (which the Apol. saith Mr. Osborn was noted for) to allow little of that in others; 
Apol. p. 414.  
P. 236 , and for such as pretend to be Inquisitive & Politicoes (as the Apol. saith Tacitus did) to have every thing a Mystery? can we think that he that slubbers over what K. James did well, and continually exposeth him in what he thinks he did ill; that will hardly allow him to have any sense of Honour and Religion; would not be shy also of allowing him one dram of sagacity above other men to find out a Riddle, or any greater title to divine Providence to help him to unfold it? Can we think that he, that was a frequenter of company, and inquisitive, (as this Author saith Osborn was) could be ignorant of such rumours as were scattered at that time abroad by the party concerned (if such there were); or that he that had a spite at the Court, would not maliciously improve them? And is there any reason to believe the one or the other upon their bare affirmation? I do not think that the credit of such will pass at this time abroad without better Certificates, and therefore since this honourable Person is he alone that hath urged some Arguments for it, 
P. 413.  as he affirms; I shall consider what he hath said. 
P. 410.  And, in the first place, I think what he hath said concerning the Letter sent to the Lord Monteagle to be very remarkable, upon which he observes, That it's pleasant to see in most of the Relations and Accounts of this Business, how the Letter appeared Nonsense forsooth to Cecil, and with what a particular adulation he seemed all along to admire the King's Comment and Exposition; for though his Majesty had as much Wit as any man living, yet the Affair was so plain, that one of a far less capacity could not miscarry in it. Herein I must confess he is very singular, and I am of his mind when he saith, 
P. 413.  perchance I have been the first that urged the present Arguments. 
P. 413.  For to this day all the World hath been of another opinion; and without doubt whoever had seen the Letter before the event did unriddle it, must have no more thought of such a design then those that read the Case, that Del Rio put, of powder being placed so, 
V. Discourse of the original of the Powder-Plot. p. 4. etc.  that the Prince and all that are in the City would be thereby destroyed, could think of the respect which that had to England. Will we hearken to their stout Apologist, he acknowledgeth that Rex & ingenio per se acer, & periculo factus acrior, 
Apol. pro. Garneto. p. 266.  etc. the King naturally of a sharp wit, and by his danger made more quick, when he could conceive no other way by which the Parliament should be destroyed, suspected, as it was, that it must be by some Mine, and so caused the place to be searched. If Barclay be to be heeded, the King was Divinely inspired. Nay, if Bellarmine 
* Tortus p. 83. edit Colon.  be to be credited, it was not discovered without a Miracle of Divine Providence. And after all these it will be of some Authority with Protestants, not only that King James in his Speech on that occasion saith it was miraculous; and that when a general obscure Advertisement was given of some dangerous blow at this time, I did (saith he) upon the instant interpret and apprehend some dark Phrases therein, contrary to the ordinary Grammar construction of them (and in another sort than I am sure any Divine, or Lawyer in any University would have taken them) to be meant by this horrible form of blowing us all up by Powder. But also the Lords and Commons in Parliament declared, 
Act of Parliament for 5. Nou.  that the Plot would have turned to the utter ruin of this whole Kingdom, had it not pleased Almighty God, by inspiring the King's most excellent Majesty with a Divine Spirit to interpret some dark phrases of a Letter showed to his Majesty, above and beyond all ordinary construction, thereby miraculously discovering this hidden Treason. After all which, whether I shall, with the aforesaid Author, 
P. 408.  say that the words of that Letter are obvious (and which he by way of scorn calls the Miraculous Letter) or, 
P. 405. Proceedings P. 118.  with Sir Edward Cook in his Speech, say upon the Authority aforesaid, that the King was divinely inspired by Almighty God, the only Ruler of Princes, like an Angel of God, to direct and point out as it were to the very place, to cause a search to be made, out of those dark words of the Letter, concerning [a terrible Blow] I leave the world to judge. But he will not only have the Letter plain for the matter of it, but also undertakes to find out the Author, which he will needs have to be the Statesman; 
P. 405.  and thinks to come off with a pretty Query or two. Is it possible (saith he) to imagine that any Man could be so mad, 
P. 406.  after he and his Partisans had brought their Plot to that perfection, had so solemnly swore by the Trinity and Sacrament never to disclose it directly or indirectly, by word or circumstance; and had resolved to blow up all the Catholic Lords, and the rest of their Friends, etc. To fancy that a man should write a Letter, that had more in it of a Plot against the State, 
P. 407.  than the bare saving of a Friend. Again, Suppose this, yet what need was there to write, that God and Man would punish the Parliament, etc. and a hundred other circumstances not only suspicious, but to no manner of purpose, unless intended for the detection of the whole Intrigue? 
P. 409.  Besides, no man really engaged in the Treason (had he been never so great a Fool) would have given warning ten days before the Plot was to be executed. 
P. 410.  And so he goes on to show how this warning was quite opposite to the designs of a Conspirator, etc. but beneficial to a Machiavilian.  
From all which we may observe how much may be said by a man of Wit, to baffle any Cause that he undertakes to overthrow; since this that he hath said, is in the ground of it false (as hath elsewhere been shewed●) and what if I had no proof of it, yet what this Honourable Person saith, is far from proving what he designs. 
History of the Gunpowder-Treason, p. 19  For he discourseth as if no one ever had been false to the Oath of secrecy which he had taken in any Conspiracy; or as if there were no persons in the World had ever done this with allowance. He discourseth as if no Person that had a Design to destroy multitudes without compassion, could not be overruled to spare one alone from a particular affection. He supposeth that no one in writing a Letter to that purpose could unwittingly let fall such things as might beget suspicion, and be a means of discovering the Design. He supposeth again that no one in so doing can be overruled by the Providence of God to go beyond what he did intend, and to betray what he resolved to keep secret. Now if any, or all of these things be true, the Letter might have been written by one that was privy to the Plot, by Percy or any of the rest, without the help of his Machiavilian, notwithstanding what ever he hath been pleased to say to the contrary. But if it was writ by him, why was it put into my Lord Monteagle's hand, who was a Roman-Catholick, and who must have been a Confident of Cecils, and privy to the whole affair? or else it might have miscarried through the hands of the Person that carried it, or the hands of him that received it (it being a kind of a Note, and delivered in the evening) or that Lord might have contemned the Admonition, as coming from an idle Fellow in the street, as this Author saith, 
P. 410.  and throw it aside; or he might have concealed and disowned it. Or if it had come safe, and that Lord did, as he did, discover and deliver it, yet the King himself might have happened not to have had the sharpness of our Authors wit, and been alike dull as others; and then the whole intention of the Letter had been lost, which was as he saith, to have the thing discovered; 
P. 411.  And so the Secretary had lost the opportunity of making his vigilance appear, and miss of the reward of being made an Earl for his Service; which are the reasons the above said Author gives of the whole. And now I should have dismissed this long Discourse of the Letter, but that he spends above a page in showing the folly of giving ten days warning, if all had not been by the design of the aforesaid Statesman. Why it was delayed on the Secretary's part, Thuanus and others do give the reason, viz. That the King being then at Royston, they kept the Letter till his return, which was Friday Novemb. 1. when it was showed him, and it was the next day brought into the Council, where it was ordered that search should be made, which was deferred till Monday evening, that they might give no occasion to Rumour or Jealousy.  
And why it was sent so long before (if I may guests for once as well as our Author hath often) I conceive it might be that the Lord Monteagle might have time to find out some pretence for his absence, or because the Person that wrote it had a sure hand to send it by.  
Having thus fixed upon one for a Contriver of the Conspiracy, and withal made him to be the Author of the aforesaid mysterious Letter, this ingenious Person did perceive that he had still said nothing, unless he was able to point to one that should be a constant spy upon the Conspirators, and an useful intelligence to the projecting Statesman; and in so doing he spares not to charge one who may be well supposed as little liable to a temptation to be thus made use of, as any of the Fraternity, and that is Mr. Tresham. For what should induce him to so great perfidiousness? 
Advocate for Liberty p. 226.  Could it be a vile education that should thus debase his mind to decoy his dear Relation (for I am told by a certain Author, that he and Catesby were Sister's Children) and intimate Friends into such a Design, and having thus decoyed them to leave them to the rigour of the Law? This might perhaps lie against a Bats, who was but a menial Servant; but Tresham was a Gentleman of an ancient Family, and had an education suitable to his extraction. Could it be necessity, and this a course made use of to patch up his broken Fortunes? This might have been a reason for a Keys, 
Proceedings p. 56.  whose Fortunes were sunk (as he acknowledged upon the Trial) but Tresham had a plentiful Estate and promised to contribute 2000 l. towards the Design. Could it be a coldness in their Religion, or that he really was of none? The contrary to that is evident, in that rather than put Garnet into danger, or not clear him of what he had before confessed against him, he chose to die with an apparent Lie in his mouth, and did pawn his Salvation to verify it. 
Proceedings p. 177.  Could it lastly be from a doubtfulness of the issue, and a resolution to provide for his own safety? That we find not a title of; but that he might have done and provided for theirs too by obliging them to desist from their Design for fear of discovery; that he might have done and never discovered them, or taken such a base course to procure. So that if we consider the thing in itself, 
Advocate of liberty. p. 225.  it might have been as well Catesby or Percy (whom an Author of theirs would also fasten a suspicion in that kind upon) or any, as Tresham.  
But there are some Reasons offered from this suspicion; for Tresham was suspected by themselves saith the Apol. 
Apol. p. 416.  But what was he suspected of, not of being a Spy or a Setter, but of having sent the Letter to the Lord Monteagle; So saith Tho. Winter in his confession; When Catesby, Tresham, and I met at Barnet, we questioned how this Letter should be sent to my Lord Monteagle, but could not conceive; for Mr. Tresham forswear it, whom we only suspected; 
Proceedings p. 58.  and this he might write, and be no such Person; nay it's certain if he had writ this Letter, he could be no Decoy, since there would then have been no need to give his Lordship any such warning; when he, being privy to the whole Transaction, was sure that the Design would be discovered, and prevented, and so neither the Lord nor any else, but the Conspirators, be in danger.  

Apol. ibid.  Well, but Tresham hanckered about the Court when all his fellow Conspirators fled, And so it's likely he did, that he might not by his flight give any suspicion; but when he was suspected, he shifted his Lodgings, saith Thuanus, and so for a time escaped. And surely this was more wisely done than to fly with the rest into the Country, where they could not but be discovered, and when nothing but plain force could secure them when discovered; and that they could have little hopes of, as long as King and Parliament and London were safe. But if he had been a Decoy, what need he have hanckered about the Court, or skulked afterwards for fear of discovery; 
Advocate for Liberty. p. 225.  if he was Cecils instrument, and had access to him at midnight (as one, that is ready to swear to the certainty of whatever the foresaid honourable Author doth with greater modesty only suspect and conjecture at, doth say) he knew where to be safe, 
Apol. p. 415, 416.  and by whom to be received. But a Setter may be hanged, that his Patron's Art might not be suspected— and if his Creature will not be satisfied with words, and is like to be dangerous and unruly, 'tis then only saying he died of a Strangury, or some sudden Distemper in Prison, as it happened here to Tresham, who, lest he should discover it, was never brought to a public Trial, but was with another [nameless Person] sent to the Tower, and they were never seen afterwards, lest they should tell tales, 
Advocate for Liberty. p 225.  as an excellent Romancer tells us. Surely Tresham was in the deepest Dungeon, where none but the sour Keeper could come to speak with him. Surely he never spoke word, but all on the sudden by the power of some poisonous Potion was made to sleep his last, and being found dead, it was given out he died of the Strangury. But now what if this Man did indeed die of the Strangury? what if he did die while his Wife and Servant were with him? What if he did not die so suddenly, 
Proceedings p. 176.  but that his Wife dealt with him to recant what ever he had said against Garnet, and to subscribe a Paper to that purpose? Why then it's to be feared that they must seek for another to bear the part of a Spy, and let Mr. Tresham die as the rest of the knot did, true so far to one another, though never so false to their King and Country. And this I shall prove beyond any question; For if Cecil was the Contriver of this Plot (as they give out) than Tresham could not be his Agent; since the whole was communicated to Winter in the latter end of the Year 1603: but Tresham was not acquainted with it, nor taken in to the number till about August 1605, as appears from Winter's Confession. 
Proceedings p. 47, 56.  So that either the Plot must not be Cecils, or Cecil must carry it on for a year and a half without such a Factor, or else he must have another that he did thus employ than Tresham. But if there was such a Satesman to contrive, and such an intelligence to carry it on; how came the Conspirators, who had some suspicion it seems of Tresham, not to make use of such a Plea to excuse themselves, or mitigate their Crime, either upon their Examination and Trial, or at their Execution? Whence again was it that those, that in those days writ Apologies for them, never offered at this, although they were such as were furnished with Intelligence enough to have found it out, and Sagacity enough to have made use of it, if it had been true? To the latter of these the answer is ready: 
Apol. p. 411.  The first Apologists (saith our Author) were strangers, as Bellarmine, Eudaemon, Johannes, etc. who perchanceeither knew not the grounds of our suspicion, or if they did, would not in print accuse a great Nobleman of a Crime, while, though true, could not yet be made good, and sufficiently proved by them, for time and patience can only bring such deeds of darkness to light. It must be confessed that the Persons he speaks of were strangers, but whether strangers to our affairs or not, is hardly to be questioned: There being so constant, settled, and exact a Correspondence maintained betwixt the Superiors and Inferiors of the Order of the Jesuits (of which Order these Apologists were) that hardly any be greater. For the Rectors and Superiors of any College must every day write down the Transactions of their House, 
Regulae societatis jesu authoritate Congregat. Generalis auctor. cap.  and every week write to the Provincial, if in Europe, and with such exactness, ut omnia tanquam praesentia Provincialis cernat, that the Provincial may understand all things by that means as if he was present. The Missionaries, who are employed abroad, 
Formula scribendi. Reg. 2, 3, 4. Reg. 5. Reg. 7, & 11.  are obliged to write also to the Provincial every week concerning such Affairs as they are concerned in, and such matters as they observe. The Provincials are under the same obligation of writing to their General at Rome once every month; and in that manner also, ut omnium rerum, omniumque personarum ac Provinciarum statum, quoad ejus fieri possit, ante oculos habeat: So that the General may as it were have before his eyes, as much as can be, the state of all Things, 
Reg. 9  Persons, and Provinces: But if this monthly and weekly writing be not sufficient; in extraordinary cases, it is to be as often as there is a necessity for it: provided that in matters of Secrecy it be in such Ciphers as the General shall appoint, 
Reg. 18.  and none but him shall have a Key to. Now who can apprehend, that any thing in a case fit to be observed should not be known as well at Rome as London; and that those who are so punctual in lesser matters should not be as precise in understanding and making their observations upon a case, which the reputation of their Religion and Society were infinitely concerned in. And as for Eudaemon-Johannes; besides he saith Neque verò mirum, 
Apol. pro. Garneto P. 3.  etc. let not any one wonder, that I write freely, not only of the manners and customs of England; but also sometimes of secret affairs, when from my youth up I have been very conversant with them. So that his converse with them, and the intelligence of his order furnished him with all things necessary for an Apologist, and withal he further pretends that etiamnum versatur Romae, etc. there are those now at Rome, 
Apol. Pro. Garneto c. 12. p. 332.  who took not only the words but the Syllables Garnet spoke before his execution. So punctual do they desire and would be thought to be in things of this nature,  
But further the Apologist saith, that those persons would not in print accuse a Nobleman of a Crime, etc. as if they were very backward to speak ill of any; though it be in their own vindication. But what then shall be said to the above said Author, who calls Sr. Edward Coke an impudent man, 
Apol. pro. Garneto p. 13.212. P. 227.  and the greatest forger of Lies and Calumnies. And saith of him, that he looks upon it as dishonourable to himself, to let any thing pass from him without a lie to back it; and yet this person whom he thus reviles was at the time of his writing Lord Chief Justice, as he owns. 
P. 1. & 22●.  What shall we say to Bellarmine in his reply to King James under the name of Tortus, who treats his Majesty in such terms, as neither became a Churchman to give, nor a Prince to take (saith Dr. Hakewel) giving me nine times the lie in express terms, and seven times charging me with falsehood, 
Answer to Carrier. p. 235.  which Phrase is equivalent to a lie; 
Premonition in his Works p. 294.  as King James himself saith. And besides other things of that kind there enumerated, compares him with Julian the Apostate, and saith Jacobus non est Christianus; 
V. Torture. Tort. p. 101, 102.  that James (not vouchsafing to call him King) was no Christian. Whence it appears they are not over thrifty of reproaches where there is occasion, and the greatness of the person shall not protect him from them, where they have a mind to bestow them. But what can we expect from such as will tell us in the face of the World that Tresham was a Decoy, 
Advocate for Liberty of Conscience p. 218, 219, 226.  that there were but four Gentlemen in the powder-Treason, that these four were necessitous or loose persons; and that if any of these were Papists, or so died, they were not so long before; Things altogether as true, as that Percy and Catesby had no weapons but their Swords; 
p. 225. p. 224.  and that there was little intimacy betwixt the Lord Monteagle and Percy. And yet all these falsehoods are to be met with in a few pages of an Advocate of theirs. Such as will dare thus to contradict, 
Apol. pro Garnet. p. 4. K. James p. 229.  not only our, but their own Books in such evident particulars (as those above mentioned, and which any one may be satisfied about in the Books referred to in the Margin) when it may serve their turn; Such as will not spare their own party in such a case, may be presumed to sacrifice the Reputation of others without difficulty for the same end; and if they can persuade us to believe these, we may be brought to believe in time there was no such Plot at all, and (to make use of the words of a learned person) if they go on in this way, 
Dr. Stillingfleets Serm. Nou. 5. 1673.  without the least shadow of proof, to lay the contrivance of this Plot on a professed Protestant: for all that I know, by the next age they may hope to persuade men, that it was a Plot of the Protestants to blow up a Popish King and Parliament. So that for all that hath been said to the contrary, we have reason to believe King James, 
Premonition to all Monarches in his works. p. 291.  who hath published to the World, that the Gunpowder-Treason was only plotted by Papists.  
Now if we reflect upon all that hath been said, and what pains hath been taken to make Cecil the deviser of all this mischief; one would think that there was nothing else could be charged upon them; and that they had never been before concerned in any Design of this nature. Who would have thought that either the Pope had issued out Breves to keep any Protestant Prince (such as K. James was) out of the Throne: or that ever any means had been used by this sort of men to prevent it! And yet Pope Clement 8. sent two Breves, one to the Laity, and another to the Clergy, to this purpose, in which it was required, 
Proceedings p. 160, 161.  that quandocunque contingeret miseram illam faeminam ex hac vita excedere; whensoever it shall happen that that miserable Woman [Q. Elizabeth] should depart this life; whosoever should lay claim or title to the Crown of England, quantumcunque propinquitate sanguinis niterentur, etc. though never so directly interessed therein, unless they were such as would not only tolerate the Catholic [Romish] Religion, but swear with all their endeavours to promote it, they should not admit them to be King of England. But these Breves, saith an Author of theirs, were so far from being a prejudice to King James, 
Cath. Apol p. 364.  that it was intended for his advantage; for there was a Letter sent to the said Clement (some two or three years before our Queen's death) under the King's own Hand and Seal, by the hand (as they said) of the Scots Secretary of State; and therein his Majesty gave his Holiness assurance of his being a Catholic, or to that purpose; therefore the Breves could not be intended to put him by, whom the Pope had already such confidence in: but their drift it seems was against several English pretenders, as my Lord of Hertford, etc. Thus far that Honourable Person. But if the Pope was so much a Friend to King James as to assert his title against all his opposers, 
Watson's Quodlibets. p. 107, 241▪ etc.  whence was it that such care was otherwise taken to set up another, and that such Books were written as Doleman, for that purpose? 
Proceedings p. 186, 187.  And whence was it that money was sent over to maintain it, as Garnet himself did confess? Whence came all these Prophecies of the confusion and misery that this Nation should be involved in upon the death of Queen Elizabeth? 
Weston, de triplici hom. Offic.  And why then did the Jesuits tamper with Catholics, as well to dissuade them from the acceptance of King James at his first coming, saying, that they ought rather to die, than to admit of any Heretic to the Crown; and that they might not under pain of Excommunication accept of any but a Catholic for their Sovereign; 
Proceedings p. 123.  as also to dissuade Catholics from their Loyalty, after the State was settled? as Watson and Clark two Seminary Priests did confess upon their apprehension. What ever is pleaded now, I am sure King James thought otherwise, 
Apology for the Oath of Allegiance in K. James his Works. p. 257.  who saith, it may be the like excuse [viz. the rashness of the Pope upon wrong Information] shall hereafter he made for the two Breves, which Clement 8th sent to England immediately before her death [Queen Elizabeth] for debarring me of the Crown, or any other that either would profess, or any ways tolerate the Professors of our Religion, etc. Catesby also was of another opinion: for when Garnet seemed to desire that the Pope's consent might be obtained to the Powder-Treason: Catesby answered, that he took that as granted by the Pope in the two Bulls or Breves before; 
Proceedings p. 167.  For if it were lawful not to receive or repel him [K. James] (as the said Bulls do import) than it is lawful also to expel and cast him out. Garnet also himself had no such thoughts, for instead of alleging that the King was not concerned in them, he only pleads that although he received them from the Pope, yet he showed them to very few Catholics in the Queen's time; 
Proceedings p. 195, 196.  and when he had understood the Pope had changed his mind, than he burned the Bulls. By which he owns that they were directed against the King, or else it were no Plea for him to make, that the Pope had changed his mind, and no excuse for himself, that he had burnt them. So King James himself argues against one that made use of the same shift with our Author, 
Tortus' lies confuted in K. James' Works. p. 341.  If the Breves did not exclude me from the Kingdom, but rather did include me, why did Garnet burn them? why would he not receive them that I might have seen them, that so he might have obtained more favour for him and his Catholics? So little was it then thought either by Friends or Foes that these Bulls were sent over on that Prince's behalf. But it seems the Pope had some broad intimation given him of King James' affection both to his Holiness and his Religion; our Author calls it, an assurance of his being a Catholic under his own Hand and Seal. And truly if it had been so, I know no better Certificate could be given at that distance; but this Honourable Person did with caution add, [to the King's Hand and Seal] that it was obtained by the fraud (as they said) of the Scotish Secretary of State. For indeed thereby hangs a tale, and though the Intrigue of this matter hath been sufficiently discovered and made evident to the World by several learned Persons; 
Bp. Andrews Tort. Torti p. 190. etc. Spotswood's Hist. Scotl. p. 508.  yet because this Story hath been revived not only by this Author, but also by a spiteful Pen amongst ourselves, 
* Dr. Moulin advances of the Church of En. towards Popery.  (whom I shall not be so severe upon, because he lately upon his Deathbed recanted that mischievous Book) I shall insert a brief account of it.  
In the year 1598., the Lord Balmerinoch Secretary of State in Scotland, at the instance of his Cousin Sir Edward Drummond, a professed Papist, did solicit the King to write a Letter to Clement the VIII in the behalf of the Bishop of Vaison, their kinsman, for a Cardinalship: suggesting withal that it would be a means to secure the succession of the Crown to his Majesty. But the King obstinately refusing, they did contrive to shuffle in a Letter, to that purpose, amongst others (omitting the Titles given to the Pope and leaving room for their insertion afterwards) and to wait when the King was ready to go on hunting to procure his hand to that with the rest. This Letter so obtained, Drummond carried to Rome; but within a while this being discovered to Queen Elizabeth, she in the year 1599 sent to the King about it. He thereupon questions Balmerinoch, who absolutely denied it, and to give the King satisfaction sent for Drummond, who abjured it. Thus it continued, till in the year 1608, when Cardinal Bellarmine undertaking to reply to the King's Apology for the Oath of Allegiance, charged him with inconstancy upon the account of this Letter. Balmerinoch happened then to come into England about other matters; the first thing put to him at Royston (where the King at that time was) was the business of this Letter, which he then confessed. upon this he was remitted to Scotland, and there Arraigned, 
Spotswood's Hist. p. 510.  and Condemned; all the while acknowledging, as he wished God to have mercy upon his Soul, that his Majesty was wrongfully charged with the writing that Letter. And that he was so, (and so it could not be an argument for the Pope's kindness to the King in those Breves) will be evident, if it be considered,  
(1.) That in the year 1599 (as above said) the thing was known, and the whole denied and abjured by the persons concerned, which the Pope could not be ignorant of. For Drummond was not only sent for over by Balmerinoch to forswear it, but was notwithstanding upon suspicion imprisoned, 
Respons. ad Tort. p. 194.  and after he had obtained his Liberty, going to Rome, did, upon the importunity of Balmerinoch, by some art procure that Letter, and sent it back to the Secretary, as he confessed.  
(2.) While the Pope had this Letter, he did show it to all Scotsmen that came to him, 
Id. 195.  enquiring if they knew the hand, and suffering some to take transcripts of it; which if he had not suspected, he would certainly have kept to himself, or communicated only to such as he could trust such a necessary secret, as that was, with.  
(3.) The Pope never did return an answer to his Majesty, nor did at all concern himself to do what he did desire of him; whereas if he had believed the Letter to be the Act of that King, he would not have so far neglected the interest of the Church, as to have slighted it.  
(4.) When not many years afterwards he, 
Id. 196.  did upon his own accord write an obliging Letter to the King, he did not only omit the Title of Son, etc. which he doth give to all Princes of their Communion; but also did not take any notice of that Letter pretended to be written; which would have been a very good ground to have fastened a desired correspondence upon.  
(5.) This was the sense of the Priests upon the point; for after this Parson's the Jesuit did declare that the King was an obstinate Heretic, 
watson's Quodlibets. p. 218. Printed 1602.  and that there was no possibility of his Conversion. And Garnet, when in the last days of Queen Elizabeth he was solicited by a Gentleman of his own Religion to favour the King's Title, answered, he would have nothing to do in it, for the King was so obdurate in his Religion, that there was no hopes of his Conversion. Now, 
Resp. ad Tortum. p. 197. Proceedings p. 136.  (as the Earl of Northampton then said in his Speech) every one may guests that it was no sleight or ordinary degree of despair that made them renounce their portion in the Son and Heir of the renowned Mary Q. of Scots, a member of the Roman Church.  
From which it appears that this Letter was the Letter of Balmerinoch, and not of King James; and that the Pope had no more a respect to it in those Breves, then there was in them intended a kindness to that King. And from all that hath been said will also appear, how little reason there is to make any other a Contriver of this Treason than the Conspirators, and their own Party.   

SECT. II. More were concerned in this Conspiracy, than were at that time publicly known and accused.  

Catholick-Apology p. 401.  THe Author of the Catholic Apology, saith that the Traitors were but thirteen Laymen, viz, Catesby, Piercy, the two wright's, Tresham, Faux, Keys, Bates, Grant, Rookwood, the two Winters and Digby, as all Writers have it, nor can any thing be more clear than that there were no more Conspirators: and he is so confident as to say, that no body was privy to it [except Owen] but these few there mentioned. Where, 
P. 528.  as he would clear the Jesuits of it, so he is forgetful of the five Laymen, besides Hall the Jesuit which suffered upon the same account at Worcester; and of those that fled, mentioned by Thuanus. However that few were taken and convicted upon it, is what, with our Historians, I freely acknowledge. I shall further yield to this Noble Author, 
Apol. p. 401.  that the Commons, Lords and Privy Council were so vigilant, that they left no stone unturned to find out the depth of the Plot: but that no more were concerned than were discovered, or that no more were discovered, was because no more were really concerned, is what none, but such as are blinded by prejudice, or biased by being of a party, can imagine.  
This will appear if we consider, the Design it itself, 
Winter's Confes. in Proceedings p. 48.  which was not only to blow up the Parliment-House, the place, as Catesby said, where they had done us the mischief, or the persons that did there contrive it; but also to strike at the root, and breed a confusion fit to beget new alterations; as Winter did then observe to him, it was to blow up the established Religion to make thereby room for their own, and to disturb the Government in order to it; and this was not to be done by fourteen Laymen, though we cast in the four Jesuits also to their assistance. Whilst the Plot lay under ground, and was to be carried on by Mining, there needed only a few heads to contrive, and a few hands to execute: and that part of it which required only the Match and the Tinder, a Faux alone was sufficient for; these might manage the more secret Negotiation. But if that had succeeded, there must many more have appeared upon the Stage to quiet or curb the multitude; to keep things safe at home, and maintain a fair Correspondence abroad. And can it be thought that such persons, as were found to have been employed herein, did not understand as much, or when they understood could neglect it? Can it be thought that such persons as ventured all they had in the World; the Gentlemen their Estates and Honours; the Jesuits their own, and the Reputation of their Society; and all of them the honour of their Religion, and their own Lives, would put all this into jeopardy, without weighing the case, and all circumstances relating thereunto? Can it be thought that Catesby, 
Eudaemon. Apol. pro. Garneto p. 4.  who was a cautious man (as Thuanus saith) and one not more eminent by birth than the endowments of his mind, as another saith; or Garnet, who was one of a sharp Wit, solid Judgement and of long Experience, 
Mori Hist. miss p. 311▪  as another saith, (being several years Provincial of his Order) and the rest, could lay the whole stress of such an important Design upon so few as twenty Persons? Can we think again such should be guilty of this omission who had been engaged in Plots from time to time; 
Proceedings p 92.  and that they who could assure the King of Spain in the Spanish Treason, that upon his Invasion the Catholics of England would have in readiness for his use and Service 1500 or 2000 Horses, could forget the like provision now, or that they could think of Horses and provide no Riders for them? 
Cath. Apol. p. 402. Paper. 9  It was without doubt upon a better Army than that of a few Servants and Horse-Boys (as the Author of the Apology reckons them up) that Sir Everard Digby was assured, that if the Design had taken place there would have been no doubt of other success; and that there would have been a League answerable to that in France.  
The Persons concerned herein were not such Novices as to undertake so much upon no prospect of good and sufficient assistance. This they well foresaw, and did in the beginning advise about, as Winter confessed; Whilst we were together, 
Proceedings p. 53.  we began to fashion our business, and discoursed what we should do after this Deed was done. The first question was, how we might surprise the next Heir, etc. and what we should do for Money and Horses, which (saith he) if we could provide in any reasonable measure, having the Heir Apparent, and the first knowledge of four or five days, was odds sufficient.  
This we find them consulting how to do without suspicion; for Garnet did hereupon write to Baldwin the Legier Jesuit in the Low-Countries, 
Proceedings p. 170.  in the behalf of Catesby, that one should move the Marquis for a Regiment of Horse for Catesby; not with any intent, as it was agreed, that Catesby should undertake the Charge, but that under colour of it, Horses and other necessaries might be provided without suspicion to furnish the Traitors. This we find further that they had done; for Watson and Clark, Priests, at their apprehension, did affirm that there was some Treason intended by the Jesuits, and then in hand; as for other Reasons, so for that they had collected and gathered together great sums of Money to Levy an Army therewith when time should serve: 
Proceedings p. 123, 124.  and had both bought up store of great Horses about the Country, and conveyed Powder and Shot, and Artillery secretly to their Friends, wishing them not to stir, but to keep themselves quiet, until they heard from them. And it seems that they had met with good success in it, for there was in June 1605 a Conference and Consultation betwixt Garnet, Catesby, 
Proceedings p. 169.  and Tresham concerning the strength of the Catholics in England, to the end that Garnet might by Letters send direct Advertisement thereof to the Pope, for that his Holiness would not be brought to show his inclination concerning any such Commotion, until such time as he should be certainly informed, that they had sufficient and able Force to prevail. By which they must suppose not only that the Catholic Party was strong in itself, but also that that strength should be in readiness upon this occasion, or else their message to the Pope had been to little or no purpose. This Sir Everard Digby in his Papers often glances at. For he saith, I shall not need to clear any living body either private or public, for, I never named any body, but reported that those that are dead did promise, that all Forces in those Parts round about Mr. Talbot would assist us, but this can hurt nothing, for they openly spoke it. 
Digbies Paper. 1. Paper. 9  So again, we all thought if we could procure Mr. Talbot to rise, that— and we had in our Company his Son in Law, who gave us some hope of, and did not much doubt it. (This I conceive to be Mr. Talbot of Pepper Hill, from what I find of him in a Manuscript in my possession.) Let us hear Sir Everard further as to this matter, The greatest of our business (saith he) stood in the possessing the Lady Elizabeth, who lying within eight miles of Dunchurch, 
Paper. 9  we would have easily surprised, etc. If she had been in Rutland, than Stoaks was near, and in either place we had taken sufficient order to have been possessed of her. In either place, we see was sufficient order, but that could not have been without a Party in Rutland, that we read nothing of. Nay, we find Sir. Everard after his Imprisonment to be not without hopes of good Seconds, and of making his terms by the fear which the Court might be in of them. For thus he saith, I have some guess that it worketh, 
Pap. 4.  but the Lieutenant maketh all show to me of the contrary; for, saith he, the Catholics are so few in number, that they are not to be feared on any terms, for on his knowledge there were not above 4000 in all England. Besides, he said they were easily pacified; I would not at all argue the matter with him, but if the number should be objected to me, etc. Whereby we may perceive what his opinion was in the case, who could not but understand in some measure what the condition and strength of his Party was, and what expectation they might reasonably have from it. The Catholics were in his Judgement many, and to be feared, and he did apprehend they would not be wanting to their Cause or them in that juncture. Which agrees with what we find observed by the Secretary, 
Proceedings p. 27.  that by divers Advertisements from beyond the Seas, he understood that the Papists were making preparations for some Combination amongst them against this Parliament time, for enabling them to deliver at that time to the King, some Petition for Toleration of Religion: which should be delivered in some such order, and so well backed, as the King should be loath to refuse their requests. It's likely that it was given out amongst, and by themselves that there was such a Petition preparing, and if they could but possess their own Party by that means, so as to be in expectation of it, it might serve to satisfy them about any report of an Insurrection; and keep them from enquiring into that which they endeavoured to keep within the breasts of a few. And this will serve to give light to what I have before said at the beginning of this Section, viz. That more were concerned in this Conspiracy than were at that time publicly known, that is, more than we read of did know of the very manner of a Plot, for the destruction of the King, etc. (as those that were to surprise the next Heir;) and many more of a Plot to bring in and set up their Religion by force of Arms. To this purpose it was that care was taken at the first for assistance from abroad; and that a continual Negotiation was maintained with Spain by the Jesuits, 
Proceedings P. 123.  as Watson and Clark did depose; which they said they were sure tended to nothing, 
Speech in Parliament. Proceedings p. 11.  but a preparation for a Foreign Commotion. It's true that King James speaks favourably in this case of Foreign Princes, and their Ministers; but if we may believe Osborn, he saith, that the King of Spain had an Army then in Flanders to land, 
Osborn King James S. 14. from D'ossat's Letter.  in the huge mist so black a Cloud must needs have caused over the Nation; and that when the people heard that his Catholic Majesty sent an Agent on purpose to Congratulate King James ' s preservation, he could not tell it the Cardinal d'Ossat without laughing in his face at so palpable a piece of flattery, 
v. proceed. p. 167 & Abb. Antilog. p. 173. b  as he conceived it to be.  
To this purpose was it that Prayers were appointed to be used by those that were Romishly affected throughout the whole Nation, 
ibid. S. 10.  as not only Osburn relates, but also as it hath been this last year confirmed from Sancta Clara's, &c. own mouth by Mr. S. in his Depositions before the Council; and is yet to be seen in a Book of theirs wrote in the beginning of King James' Reign, 
Seven sparks of the enkindled Soul, etc. p. 25.26,  where are many passages relating hereunto; in a consolatory Psalm (as it's there called) its said, Confirm your hearts in hope, for your Redemption draweth nigh. The year of Visitation draweth to an end, and Jubilation is at hand. England shall be called a happy Realm, a blessed Country, a Religious People. 
P. 29, 30.  Those which knew the former glory of Religion, shall lift up their hands for joy to see it— returned again. Righteousness shall prosper, and Infidelity shall be plucked up by the roots! Again, 
Pag. 28.  false Error shall vanish like smoke: and they which saw it shall say, where is it become? The Daughters of Babylon shall be cast down, and in the dust lament their ruin. Proud Heresy shall strike her Sail; 
P. 31.  and groan as a Beast crushed under a Cart Wheel.— The memory of Novelties shall perish with a crack, as a ruinous House falling to the ground. Repent ye Seducers with speed, 
P. 32.  and prevent the dreadful Wrath of the most Powerable.— He will come as a flame that burneth out beyond the Furnace, 
P. 33.  his fury shall fly forth as Thunder, and pitch upon their tops which malign him. So in the fifth Psalm of his composure— They [Enemy's] shall perish in thy Fury: and melt like wax before the fire. I have repeated the more from this Book, because it was made about that season, and also because it's very hard to be got. From which we may observe (1.) That the Jubilee they expected was very near. (2.) That this was to be by the destruction of their Enemies. (3.) That it should be such a destruction as would render the Enemies uncapable of resistance or recovery. (4.) The manner is as much pointed out as a thing of that nature (that was a Secret, and charily to be kept as such) could be; Heresy shall vanish like smoke; the memory of Novelties shall perish with a crack; he will come as a flame that burneth out beyond a Furnace, etc. As the time drew on, so they were more secure of success, and more confident and open in their expectations of it. Thus it was abroad; for Henry Flood a Jesuit caused the Jesuits at Lisbon to spend a great deal of Money on Powder, upon a Festival day, a little before the Gunpowder-Treason in England, to make experiment of the force of it; 
Robinson's Anatomy of the English Nunnery at Lisbon.  and persuaded one John How (a Merchant whom he had perverted) and divers other Catholics to go over into England, and to expect their Redemption there (as he called it) a while; as we have the relation of it. Thus it was also at home, for a few days before the appointed time, Garnet meets the other Traitors at Coughton in Warwickshire, which was the place of Rendezvouz, 
Proceedings p. 170.  whither they resorted out of all Country's. And upon the first of November Garnet openly prayeth for the good success of the great Action concerning the Catholic Cause in the beginning of the Parliament; adding these Verses of an Hymn in the end of his Prayer,—  
Gentem auferte perfidam  
Credentium de finibus,  
Vt Christo laudes debitas  
Persolvamus alacriter.  
This Garnet never denied, but pleaded that he went thither with a purpose to dissuade Mr. Catesby, 
Proceedings p. 216, 217.  when he should have come down— An Answer most absurd (as the Earl of Salisbury replied to him) seeing he knew Catesby would not come down till the 6 th' of November, which was the day after the Blow should have been given; and Garnet went into the Country ten days before. If this had been his Errand, it would rather have kept him in London, where Catesby was, than carried him from it.  
As to the Prayer he used, he had prepared this Answer (as he told Hall in their secret Conference together) It is true (saith he) that I prayed for the good Success of that great Action, but I will tell them, 
Proceedings p. 189.  that I meant it in respect of some sharper Laws, which I feared they would then make against the Catholics: And that answer shall serve well enough. In which (1.) he plainly grants that he had another end in reciting that verse, than he would own to them that should examine him upon it. (2.) It appears that the end which he did it for, was what he was very much afraid to have discovered. As is evident from his own Letters, in one of which he saith, I know not how I shall satisfy them about my Journey to Coughton; 
Abbot to Antilogia, p. 144 b. 145 b.  and in another, there is a rumour of a Sermon preached by me at Hall; I am afraid it's that which I made at Coughton. And he further said to Hall, If I can clear myself of this (which I hope to do) I care not what otherwise they have to object against me, etc. And can we then think that it was by chance that he recited those Verses (being used in the Octaves of All-Saints day) as his Apologist saith; 
Apolog. pro Garneto. p. 201.  or that the Prayers then used were only for Toleration, as the English Apologist would have it. If this had been true, 
Cath. Apol. p. 436.  what need he be so careful about it, what need he take such care for an answer to it? If it had been by chance, the thing would have spoke for itself. Or if it had been for Favour and Toleration, it was not what they needed to be afraid to own: for how could it be more dangerous to pray to God for success in it than it would have been to frame a Petition and present it to their Prince for it? It sounds somewhat better, which one of the above said Authors doth frame upon further consideration; that when Garnet despaired of hindering the Conspirators, 
Apolog. pro Garneto, p. 265, & 320.  the good man having tried all humane ways in vain, adds the public prayers to his own, ut Deus, vel pestem eam averteret, vel si ita expedire videret, felicem certè funesto facinori exitum daret; That God would either divert it, or grant an happy conclusion to this Villainous Enterprise; 
Ibi● pp 320.  and that what ever happens it might turn to the good of the Church, as he again expounds himself. By which we see how much they are put to it that would give a colour to an ill action; how they say and unsay, (as this Author doth) one while its by chance, another while by choice; and how they contradict one another. Unhappy Man! that could not light upon these answers that are since made for him; and very fortunate are they that can frame Apologies for Actions which those that were intimately concerned in them never thought upon. But as long as this Prayer was then used, and no better account can be given of it by him or those that speak for him; we have all the reason in the world to believe it to have a respect to the Action that he, and the rest, were condemned for; and that this was a part of those Forms of Prayer, that were sent down and used for the success of that great Errand, 
Premonition to Monarches in K. James' Works. p. 291.  as King James saith. It is granted then that there was an intimation given out of some great Design on foot against the Session of Parliament; but whether it did respect a Petition against, some sharper Laws at that time feared to be made against Catholics (as Garnet said) or whether a Toleration (as another) or whether the Powder-Treason and an Insurrection upon it, I hope what hath been already said will help in good measure to resolve; although we cannot so particularly point to Time and Place, Persons, and Counsels herein concerned, & what are indeed impossible, in our Circumstances, fully to discover. The Author of the Catholic Apology saith, that Winter, 
Cath. Apol. p. 528.  in his printed Confession descends to all particulars; which, if true, would have afforded an excellent light to us. But that is far otherwise, for that Confession was taken the 23 of November 1605, not long after his apprehension; and it was immediately published to give some satisfaction to the World; 
Proceed. p. 46.  but being imperfect, he was afterwards taken into further Examination, 
Abbati Antilogia p. 113. a p. 162. b  and many other things were confessed by him upon it. In his printed Confession, we have an account of the Beginning and Progress of the Gunpowder-Treason, (strictly so called), there we have an account of what was debated and projected by them in the Vault, and what Provisions they were further to make for the accomplishing the Design: but all the while there is not a word of what was done in order to it. All this could not be done without Men, and Arms, Horses and Money; but we read nothing then of the Levies that were made, of the Horses that were in readiness, nor of the Treasure that was provided (except what was subscribed by Tresham and Digby) and yet we are as sure that such a Design was not to be carried on without these, as we are that there was such a Design. Therefore it will be fit to inquire from whence it is that we have no fuller account as to these matters. And we shall be helped in this, if we consider,  
(1.) That in the beginning of such a Design as this was, there was no need of many Assistants, (as I have before showed) and so they took into it no more than they had present occasion for, either in working in the Mine, etc. or bearing the Charge. Whatever Accomplices they had abroad, had nothing else to do, but to lie quiet, and wait till the hour did approach and the Signal was given. So Watson the Priest confessed, that they had brought up store of great Horses, 
Proceed. p. 124.  and conveyed Powder, etc. secretly to their Friends, wishing them not to stir, but keep themselves quiet until they heard from them. From hence it was that either none were discovered but the head Contrivers of it; or those, that upon presumption of the success above, got too early into arms, as Grant etc. or such as being sure, if any, to be discovered got into a body, and endeavoured for that reason to provoke others to join with them, as Catesby, etc. but the rest that were to lie still, and to keep themselves quiet till the Blow was given, thought it best in prudence, when it had miscarried, to continue so.  
(2.) The increasing of Assistants, and the communicating of their Counsels to many at the first, was so far from being needful, that it would have been dangerous. It would have endangered the whole, for by that means the Design might have got Air, and been defeated. It would have endangered their Friends (if it had been discovered) and needlessly exposed them. This was the reason that Owen gave, 
Proceed. p. 56.  why Sir William Stanley would not be acquainted with any Plot (though a hearty Wellwisher to it) as having business afoot in the Court of England, (for fear, i. e. if the Plot should be discovered, and he discovered to be privy to it, he should then lose his Interest there) and not that he would not trust him with such a secret, 
Cath. Apol. p. 528.  as the Author of the Cath. Apol. would have it.  
(3.) When they did communicate their Design to any, and take them into their Counsel and Assistance, it was with all the Caution imaginable. For they took an Oath of Secrecy, and the Sacrament upon it; 
Proceed. p. 41. p. 51.  the sum of the Oath was;  
You shall swear by the blessed Trinity, 
Proceed. p. 166.  and by the Sacrament you now purpose to receive, never to disclose, directly or indirectly, by word or circumstance, the matter that shall be proposed to you to keep secret; nor desist from the Execution thereof, until the rest shall give you leave.  
The like care was taken with respect to Owen, Bates, 
Ibid. p. 56. 104. & 241.  and Digby. And Garnet himself confesseth, that by word and writing, he had often protested that he would never betray them. 
Tort. Torti. p. 286.  So that it seems they had obliged even Him after some solemn manner to Secrecy.  
(4.) Their Caution was further remarkable, that, neither the manner of the thing was known to many, nor the Persons frequently to each other. It was enough to prepare their Party by some general Intimation; but the How, or the What, or the Where, was what the principal Cabal and Consult kept for the most part secret to themselves. So much is acknowledged by Sir Everard Digby; As I did not know it directly, 
Paper 1.  that it was approved by such (referring to some Persons of great authority either in point of Dignity, Wisdom, or Conscience) so did I hold it in my conscience the best, 
Paper 9  not to know any more if I might. So again, This answer [of Garnet's] with Mr. Catesby ' s proceedings with him and me, gave me absolute belief that the matter in general was approved, though every particular was not known. He that was privy to the main, and a principal Undertaker in one great part of the Design, which was to seize upon the Princess, and head the party that was thereabouts, was ignorant in some other things relating to it. And what he did not desire to know if he might, others its likely might not know, if they desired it. Those that knew their own work, and were assigned to some particular Office, might know no more what They did, or were to do, who were above, than every little Officer in a Reigment, is acquainted with the Debates and Resolves of a secret Council of War: and they that were ready to obey, and whose work it was to observe the motions of the Commander in their eye, might think no more of killing the King, or of blowing up the Parliament, than that they should be blown up themselves. The good of the Catholic Cause, and an Insurrection for promoting it, is what perhaps such might be trusted with the knowledge of; but the Destruction of the Royal Family (excepting one whose name they were to make use of) and setting up a Protector, might be as little known to them, as their Commanders are to us. They might have an Intimation of a great Alteration coming on, and of the happy days that were approaching; and half a sentence might serve to break the business to them (whom they would prepare for it) and a nod to supply what was farther to be revealed, but that should be left till time and success should interpret it. Thus speaks Henry Morgan, who being asked by Hammond the Jesuit (unto whom he amongst the rest made confession) what led him to join with Winter, etc. answered, I did not, saith he, well understand it, but they told me that Religion and Life was at stake, 
Abboti. Antilog. p. 154. b.  and so it was matter of Conscience induced me to it. When therefore the case is thus, we can have no better information, or understand more from such, than they were permitted to understand.  
For the same reason was it, that, 
Cambden. Eliz.  as it was in the Invasion 1588., the Conspirators were not generally known to one another, unless those who were of the Cabinet Council. Every one knew his immediate fellow or partner, and perhaps his Commander; but the number and strength, or persons otherwise he could in such a case at best but suspect; so we find that neither Littleton, 
Abbot. Antilog. p. 164. b.  nor Rookwood knew Greenwell. And that they did practise according to this Principle is evident from Winter's Confession, where we read that Catesby desired Leave, that he with Mr. Percy, and a third, 
Winter's Confession, in Proceed. p. 55.  whom they should call, might acquaint whom they thought fit and willing to the business: for many, said he, may be content that I should know, who would not therefore that all the Company should be acquainted with their names. 
Paper 9  So Sir Everard Digby, I knew, saith he, that Faux could reveal me, for I must make choice of two besides Mr. Catesby, which I did of him and Mr. Winter. He had a part which he would not have every one acquainted with. But above all Garnet was most cautious herein, who was wont for a good while to converse only with Catesby, and those of his own order about this business; 
Casauboni Epist. ad Ducaeum p. 94.  insomuch as Sir Everard Digby saith, in the place before quoted, I did not know it directly that it was approved by such; 
Pap. 1.  which he principally understands of Garnet; for he saith further, Before that I knew any thing of this Plot, 
Paper 9  I did ask Mr. Farmer [i. e. Garnet, 
Proceeds p. 144.  for that was one of the six names he was called by] what the meaning of the Pope's Brief was; he told me that they were not (meaning Priests) to undertake or procure any stirs, etc. and this answer, with Mr. Catesby's proceedings with him and me, gave me absolute belief that the matter in general was approved, etc. So that he understood Garnet's meaning indirectly only by the answer given to that question, and by the account which Catesby also gave him of the Provincial's opinion in the case. Catesby being his mouth to the Company, and giving them assurance that it was Garnet's Judgement as well as his own. This Garnet doth acknowledge, in a Letter of his, 
Tort. Torti. p. 286.  what should I do? saith he, first of all the other Conspirators did accuse me; and again, Catesby always made use of my Authority with them, by which means he persuaded almost every body to think well of the matter. Thus carefully did this subtle Man proceed, that he might preserve his own Honour and Life, and that which seemed to be as dear to him as both, the honour of his Order and Society. From all which we see, that though the party hung together, yet it was by such strings that few could perceive among themselves, the clue being in the hands of the Chief of the Conspiracy: and that consequently we cannot expect that full and clear Evidence, as we might have had, had such of them as Catesby and Piercy lived to make discovery; or had such of them as lived to be examined and tried, been inclined to it. But that we find otherwise. For,  
5. When they were discovered, and apprehended, they did with great obstinacy deny every thing that either was not forced from, or could not be directly proved against them. 
Proceed. p. 38.  Thus Faux laid all the blame upon himself, and would confess none of his complices, till he was carried to the Tower and showed the Rack. Thus resolved, we find Sir Everard Digby, who saith, 
Paper 1.  more reasons I had to persuade me to this belief, than I dare utter, which I will never to the suspicion of any, though I should to the Rack for it. 
Paper 9  So again, I will do as much as my Partner wisheth, and it will then appear, that I shall not hurt or accuse one man: and however I might in general possess them with fear, in hope to do the Cause good; yet my care was ever to lose my own Life, rather than hurt the unworthiest Member of the Catholic Church. Tell her I have ever loved her and her House, etc. and I will not live to manifest the contrary. Where we find that they were much afraid of him, who was able to do them a great deal of mischief from the knowledge that he had of the Party and the Design; and who perhaps they thought might be induced to it from the desire of life, being but about 24 years old, and one of a plentiful estate; 
Preface to his papers.  but he shows himself to be true to his Principles and Engagements. Of the like temper and resolution do we find Mr. Habington, 
Mss. H.  for saith he, My Lord Chief Justice fell in the end to two points. The one, If Mr. Tesmond ever moved me to join with Sir Everard Digby, Mr. Catesby, Mr. Winter and others in Rebellion against the King, but that they could not prove; the other If I knew of Mr. Garnet' s being in my house. I too confident they would not confess any thing against me, denied them both. He doth not deny but that the whole was true; only the one wanted proof, and he did believe the other would never be confessed. And he had good reason for it; for he tells us, that it was mutually resolved by Garnet, Hall and himself, that if those two were at any time taken in his House, we should, saith he, absolutely renounce all knowledge and acquaintance one with another. Of this we have also another instance in one Owen, who was Garnet's man, 
Thuanus  that rather than be tortured (which he was in fear of) and any thing should be wrested from him to the damage of his Party, 
Abboti Antil. p. 114.  ripped up his own Belly, and so died; by the Wound, I say, which he gave himself, and not by having his Bowels forced out by Torture, 
Apol. pro Garneto.  as Garnet's lying Apologist would persuade the World.  
But amongst all their Accomplices they were most of all bend to conceal their Priests, and by no means to own any of them to be in the Confederacy. There was nothing Sir Everard Digby seemed to be more concerned to clear himself of the suspicion of offending in; As yet, saith he, 
Paper 1.  they have not got of me the affirming that I know any Priest particularly, nor shall ever do to the hurt of any, but myself. And I have before all the Lords cleared all the Priests in it for any thing I know. And this he was so resolved in, that he would not utter any thing to the suspicion of any such, though, saith he, 
Ibid. & pap. 7.  I should to the Rack for it. And to testify his affection further that way, he was resolved to clear them at the Bar, for thus saith he; Sure I am that I never did yet confess to know him [one that he calls Brother, who is a Priest, 
Proceed. p. 166.  and, by his being said to give the Sacrament to five at one time, I conceive is meant Gerard, who did administer it to Catesby and four others of the Conspirators at the beginning of the Plot] nor any of the three. 
Morus in Hist. saith Gerard p. 314. was very familiar with Digby.  I do it not in regard of myself, as it shall appear at the Bar: for whatsoever I could do for him or any of his [i. e. his Order] I would do it though it cost me never so much sufferance: but I have been sparing in that, because I may do more in public, which will I think be best; as you wish, I will do, etc. This also he did, seeking by Protestations to clear all Jesuits of those practices which they themselves confessed, 
Paper 5.  ex ore proprio; as the Earl of Salisbury said. 
Proceedings p. 220.  In order to which they though it allowable, nay, praiseworthy, to lie, and perjure themselves. As to the former we have too many instances in Sir Everard's Papers, for he denies that ever he took the Sacrament to keep secret the Plot; because, saith he, 
Paper  I would avoid the question; at whose hands it were. He denied that Father waly [i. e. Garnet, for that is another of his names] was at Coughton with him; 
Paper 3.  though Garnet confessed it afterwards himself. He affirmed that he did not know Darcy [who was also so called] to be the same with Garnet, 
Paper 7.  and that he did not take him to be a Priest; though he was very well acquainted with him. And if we will put their Principles to it, we may see how far they will go in Tresham; who when he had before let fall some words tending to make Garnet guilty of the Spanish Treason; rather than he would be guilty (as he and his Wife thought) of so great impiety, as to bring a Priest into danger by a true accusation, chose to perjure himself, and as he was a dying man (for within three hours after he died) and hoped for Salvation, did acquit him of it, saying, that he had not seen the Provincial in sixteen years before; whereas by Garnet's own confession they had had frequent Conversation with each other for the three years' last passed. But if these Gentlemen (who usually stand upon the honour of their word) would go about to excuse all Jesuits how foul soever, out of an opinion that it is meritorious so to do, 
Proceed. p. 220.1.  at such time as they had no hope of themselves, as the Earl of Salisbury observed: Then what may not be expected from the Jesuits themselves, who had so powerfully instilled these Principles into persons otherwise generous, and when their own life and honour, and the honour of their Religion and Society came deeply to beconcerned. We may then expect obstinacy and subtlety should meet together, and all that Art and Nature can do shall be made use of to clear them of the scandal and danger that would otherwise befall them. And we shall not fail of an example herein, if we do but peruse the Examinations, and Trial, the Answers, and Confessions of Garnet, who at this time was the Provincial of that Order in England. We shall find his great care was not so much to speak Truth, as to serve his Cause, and excuse himself; and if he could but dress up a Story, 
Abboti Antil. p. 137. a 146. b.  and make what he calls Formalis Fabula (in one of his Letters that was intercepted), he would not want Confidence, and the most powerful Asseverations to confirm it. I shall not trouble the Reader with the petty ways he had of saying and unsaying as might serve his turn; 
Proceed. p. 174.  As when before the Lords Commissioners he truly and freely confessed his Treasons, being (as himself under his own hand confessed) overwhelmed, Tanta nube Testium, yet, ad faciendum populum, to delude the People and preserve his own Reputation; in his Letters which he wrote abroad, he cleareth himself of the Powder-Treason, as Sir Edward Coke relates. These are Tricks not to be taken notice of in comparison of the boldness which he at other times did take to excuse and clear himself. Is he charged with having writ Letters to Greenwell, and when he had denied it, required to give his answer upon the word of a Priest? 
Abboti. Antil. p. 136. b.  he again denies it obstinately; and yet the Commissioners had then the Letters in possession▪ upon which, he contented himself to say, that he denied it, because he thought they had them not. 
Proceed. p. 195.  Is he demanded whether Hall and He had conference together, and desired not to equivocate? how stiffly did he deny it upon his Soul, reiterating it with so many detestable Execrations, as the Earl of Salisbury said, it wounded their Hearts to hear him; and yet when it was proved to his face, confessed the thing; as not only the Proceedings, 
Abboti. Antil. p. 146. a.  but his own Letters do declare; coming off with this Salvo, That when any one is charged before a Magistrate, he is not bound to answer before Witnesses are produced; 
Casaub. Epist. ad Ducaeum, p. 117, 118.  quia nemo tenetur prodere seipsum, because no one is bound to betray himself. This is a new way of arguing, but it's not the only singular thing befell him in that kind; For whereas all Mankind do practise Sincerity at their death; yet even then he could not forget to prevaricate; for he said upon the scaffold immediately before his Execution, 
Proceedings p. 225 , that he only had a general knowledge of the Fact by Mr. Catesby, etc. and what he knew in particulars was in Confession: when yet the King had under his own Handwriting to the contrary (as the Recorder wished him to remember) as shall be showed in the next Section. So that upon the whole he abundantly made good what the Earl of Northampton said to him at his trial, I confess that never any man in your state gave less hold or advantage to Examiner's, 
Proceedings P. 201.  than you have done in the whole course of Proceeding, to us that were in Commission: sometime by forswearing, as upon the Confession of Hall your fellow: sometime by dissembling, as about the places of your Rendezvous, which was the Lapwings Nest: sometime by artificial Equivocation: sometime by sophisticating true Substances: sometime by adding false qualities: yet sat superest, as may appear, to the defeat of your Inventions, and the defence of the King's Majesty; quia magna est veritas, & praevalet.  
Now if we lay all these things together, and consider, how few the design, (as far as it went), needed to have actually concerned in it, how cautious they were in choosing persons for their turn, and in obliging them to secrecy when they were chosen; how cunning they were to show the Plot by parts, and in disposing of Persons; so that few amongst them did know, and so should not betray each other, (if through fickleness or fear they might be so disposed); how firm and resolute they were upon discovery and apprehension; it is so far from being an objection against the History of this Plot, which makes it popish, that so few were discovered; that its matter of wonder there is so much reason as there is to prove it to be so. Now it may be worth our while a little to consider how they came by so much evidence as they had in the Case.  
As,  
(1.) Some things were evident of themselves, and not to be denied, they being taken in the fact; as it was with Faux, and those of them that were openly in Arms.  
(2.) Other things were confessed, for fear of the Rack, or the little taste they had of it; as it was with Faux in his first Confession.  
(3.) So much Intelligence being obtained; the Commissioners showed this to the others, and so drew them on to confess more. This is one of the reasons Garnet gives to excuse himself for confessing so much as he did, in one of his Letters that was intercepted. This is the account he also gave of himself as to that matter at his death. Being upon the Gibbet he said— to whom [the Lords of the Privy-Council] I remember my humble duty, and I am sorry that— I did dissemble with them; but I did not think that they had such proof against me, 
Proceedings p. 227.  till it was showed me: but when that was proved, I held it more honour for me at that time to confess, than before to have accused.  
(4.) Sometimes it was by several Examinations, at some distance of time; this put Garnet to it; as he acknowledgeth in his Letter to Mrs Ann; Let any one think, saith he, after 23 several Examinations by the wisest men of the Nation, 
Ibid.  besides particular Discourses with the Lieutenant of the Tower, what could be done. It's nothing but truth can in such a case make a Man constant to himself, and he therefore that had nothing but, what he calls formalis fabula, 
Tortura Torti. p. 285.  a forged story to save himself, must needs be often at a loss. As it happened to him; 
Abboti Antil. p. 137.  for sometime he would say Greenwel told him the business in Confession, sometimes it was by way of Consultation: one while upon the word of a Priest he burned the Pope's Breves as soon as King James was Proclaimed; another time he burned them at Coughton.  
(5.) Sometimes they did discover themselves through want of understanding one another. 
Tortura Torti. p. 285.  As it was with Garnet, who knowing Catesby was dead, and thinking Greenwell had made his escape, concluded he might then safely say any thing, and so would own no other knowledge of the Plot but what he had in confession: but afterwards understanding (through Misinformation) that he was taken, lest Greenwell should confess and prevent him in it, he then acknowledged that he had it out of Confession.  
(6.) Sometimes a Confession was extorted by confronting of Evidence. So when Garnet declared that he had no design of writing in behalf of Baynham, but to prefer him to a Command; 
Abboti Anti p. 141. a  being opposed herein by the Testimony of Faux, who said that he was sent to Rome on purpose to implore the Pope's aid for their Assistance upon the success of their Design; he did then confess it. So it was betwixt Hall and him; as it follows.  
(7.) Sometimes a discovery was made by the intercepting of their Letters or discourse; and both these befell Garnet. 
Proceedings p. 173, 200. These are quoted often in Abboti Antilog. and Tortura Torti, etc.  For undertaking to write a Letter to one Rookwood a Priest, at that time in the Gatehouse; and another to Mrs. Ann Vaux; and a third to the Fathers and Brethren, etc. they were all taken, and much discovered by them. Again, having a mind to discourse with Hall the Jesuit, then also a Prisoner in the Tower; and prevailed with the Keeper to find out a way for it. 
Proceed. p. 189, & 199.  The Keeper did so, but withal discovered it; and two Gentlemen of unquestionable Reputation being placed secretly within the hearing of it, gained considerable particulars against him, which he was forced by that means to confess. By these and the like means was their obstinacy and subtlety conquered, and the Intelligence drawn from them which we have as to this matter. But where these reasons were not, we are little beholden to them. For what is said of Garnet in a more especial manner; 
Casa●uboni Epist ad Ducaeum p. 116. Abboti Antil. p. 136. b. Cath. Apol. p. 401.  that there was no Truth gained from him, which he did not find himself constrained to confess by Witnesses and Testimonies of undoubted Credit; is also in proportion true of all the rest, forasmuch as I can perceive by the most diligent Enquiry.  
The Author of the Cath. Apol. saith, that there were no more Conspirators, because no Gentleman was discovered, [besides those that were killed, and taken, and Owen] which could not happen out of design to save their Friends. This he offers two reasons for: (1.) Because several particulars (which might have been easily kept secret) were revealed, as may be found in their printed Confessions. (2.) The Malefactors did accuse their Confessors, and therefore certainly they would never have spared others, had there been any guilty. This cannot be supposed, 
Rom. Chur. vindicated p. 65.  saith another, that they had not Tenderness enough to leave any other undiscovered; whose Conscience compelled them, to expose their own Confessors to their deserved Penalty. To which the last Author adds, (3.) That not one Nobleman, or any other of the Catholic Gentry did know or approve of that wicked conspiracy; because the Catholic Lords [all of them, 
Cath. Apol. p. 406.  saith the Cath. Apol.] were to have undergone the same barbarous Fate with the rest.  
But I cannot conceive the force of the first Argument; for what if there were several particulars revealed by them, which might easily have been kept secret? Might not that be so, and yet there be nothing of Sincerity and Conscience in the case? Might it not be done for the connexion of one thing to another? (which often times makes Circumstances to be necessary, as it is there.) Might it not be done to impose upon the Examiner's, and to let them think that when they are so exact in the less, they will not let slip the greater? And have we not just cause to think this to be the reason, rather than what the Apologist doth offer for it? If indeed these printed Confessions had been so exact (as he will needs suppose) then there had been some colour for what he says; but when the contrary is manifest, his Argument falls of itself. And that this is so, appears from what I have before observed, for Faux and Winter upon second Examination confessed more; and what they did afterward confess was so material, as could not be forgotten by them before, had they not been willing to have concealed it, if they well could. But again, where is the consequence (setting aside the conscience in it) that because they did sometimes let fall some things of little importance, therefore they must needs also reveal things of an higher nature; therefore they must betray those Friends, who had not by any overt Acts discovered themselves? So that before this Argument must be granted, we must grant that Faux and Winter were privy to the whole Plot; and that part in which they were not personally concerned, as well as what they were. We must grant, that they made conscience of not concealing any part or particular of it, (as far as they knew); and we must further grant that all these particulars are contained in their printed Confessions. Or else we may safely conclude, that notwithstanding there are several Particulars revealed in their printed Confessions (which might have been easily kept secret) they might have a design to save their Friends; and there might be more Persons in the Plot than are recorded in their Confessions; and (which is pity) a pretty Argument is thereby lost; and which is worse than that, it might be a Popish and general Plot notwithstanding.  
But however, will they say, if they were sincere in those Confessions, than a part of it still remains good; and what greater Argument can there be for that they were sincere, than that they did accuse their own Confessors (which is a thing, that nothing but the power of truth can force them to) and if they did not spare them, they would certainly not spare others. In answer to which I shall consider, 

1. Whether they did thus accuse their Confessors?  
2. Whether if they did, their Conscience (as is pleaded) compelled them to it?    
As to the first,  
1. It is notorious, that there were several of them did not at all accuse their Confessors; this is certain as to Sir Everard Digby, that he (against his own knowledge) did all he could upon his Trial to vindicate them: And if we peruse the printed Confessions, we shall not find a word to that purpose. If Faux and Winter did afterwards accuse any, it was what they were, if not very backward and cold, yet very imperfect in. For the Earl of Salisbury tells Garnet; 
Proceedings p. 194.  Let it not be forgotten that this interlocution of yours with Hall, overheard by others, appears to be digitus Dei: for thereby had the Lords some light and proof of matter against you, which might have been discovered otherwise by violence and coercion. Implying, as Morus observes, that they had not matter before sufficient to charge him with. 
Mori Hist. p. 315.  The great thing charged upon him seems to be, that some of the others confessed, 
Antilog. p. 146. b.  that his name was used to them by Catesby to justify the lawfulness of the Act, as Garnet in one of his Letters doth say; but what he there adds, that All did so confess, is manifestly false. Since, besides what is abovesaid of Sir Everard, Morus doth declare, 
Mori Hist. p. 314.  that nothing was confessed against the Jesuits, but what Bates said of Greenwel [or Greenway] viz. that he was in the company of the Conspirators; and which Sir Everard said, 
Digbies Paper. 3.  he heard he should confess of waly (or Garnet.) So that when these late Apologists say the Traitors did all accuse and expose their Confessors, it's more than was true, and more than the Jesuits will thank them for. For all of them that hitherto pleaded the cause of the Jesuits do say the contrary; 
Mori Hist. p. 313.  More shall speak for the rest; who saith, for aught I can perceive, the accusation of the Jesuits hath no other foundation than the Confession of Bates, who is said to have accused Greenway, etc. and he would persuade us also, that Persons of good credit reported that while in Prison he confessed that he had accused him falsely. 
Ibid. p. 314.  How true this is I shall afterward consider; but I produce this to show what contrary things these men will say if it may serve their Cause; when in the last age it was pleaded none did accuse the Jesuits, and when in ours they would have it that they were accused by all.  
But (2.) Supposing they did accuse their Confessors, yet it was not because their Conscience did compel them to it; This More will have them so far from, that he saith, Bates did accuse them in hope of life, and afterward recanted. But whether Bates did so or no; yet in point of reason it is evident that it was not from any such motive: for than they that thus accused them would have repent of the Eact itself, and looked upon it as an Evil, & fit to be repent of. For what could move them in point of Conscience thus to expose them, if it was not that the Fact was evil, which their Confessors together with them had been complicated in? But this we find them far from acknowledging: For Sir Everard Digby (though for a little while after his imprisonment he doubted of the warrantableness of it, 
V. Preface to his papers. & Paper. 1.  yet being confirmed in it by the Letters of Gerard, whom he calls Brother) was so well satisfied, that he calls it the best Cause. 
Pap. 4.  Of the like mind were Robert Winter and Faux; for having found an opportunity for Conference in the Tower from the nearness of their Lodgings, Robert Winter said to Faux, 
Proceedings p. 125 & 126.  that he and Catesby had Sons, and that Boys would be Men, and that he hoped they would revenge the Cause: Nay that God would raise up Children to Abraham out of stones. And they added, that they were sorry, that no body did set forth a Defence or Apology of their Action; but yet they would maintain the Cause at their deaths. And so it's likely they did, 
K. James' Premonition, in his Works. p. 291.  for King James saith, that some of them continued so obstinate, that even at their death, they would not acknowledge their fault; but in their last words, immediately before the expiring of their Breath, refused to condemn themselves, and crave pardon for their deed, except the Romish Church should first condemn it.  
Of this we have a particular example in Grant, when being admonished just before his death by a learned and reverend Person to ask pardon of God for his offence; he confidently and readily replied; 
Casaub. Epist. ad Ducaeum p. 91.  That he was so well satisfied that there was no sin in the case, that on the contrary, he thought that he deserved so well for that generous and brave Attempt, that it would abundantly suffice for a satisfaction for all the sins of his whole life. So little did they generally repent of the Fact, and so little reason have we to think that what they confessed proceeded from compulsion of Conscience; but rather that it was from some other reason; as fear of the Rack, or surprise, or because others had confessed, or that they themselves had given occasion from what they had before confessed for a further enquiry, etc. So it happened with Faux and Th. Winter who at the first accused none of the Jesuits; 
Abboti Anlog. p. 159. b  but having confessed that they received the Sacrament, that led the way to a further Examination about the Priests, whom they at last confessed also. This Sir Everard foresaw, and therefore he took another course, (as is before observed) and denied that he had received the Sacrament at all upon this occasion. Now that what I have before said is true, 
Ibid. 152. Ibid. 155. Ibid. p. 154. b.  will appear from the behaviour of Stephen Littleton, who though he had confessed that he sent to Hall (after their defeat) for advice whither to retire; and had, with others, acknowledged that he and the rest had confessed to Hammond (a little before) yet he absolutely refused to answer whether he received Absolution from him for the Fact, or had his Conscience satisfied by him about it; and added, that he would rather die than reveal the secrets of that matter. And Robert Winter, who had at first confessed that all the Jesuits named, were privy to and engaged with them in the Conspiracy; yet, as is before observed, did maintain their Cause, 
Ibid. p. 154. a.  and resolve to defend it at his death. Truly I find none of them that had any touch of Remorse but Rookwood and Tho. Winter; and for the latter it is observable that when he said, I shall set down mine own Accusation, 
Proceedings p. 46.  etc. which I shall the faithfuller do, since I see such courses are not pleasing to Almighty God; Yet was so far from doing so, 
Ibid. 154. b  that he speaks there not one word of Gerard (whom upon a further Examination he discovered) or any other Jesuit; so that his Confession at that time seems rather to be owing to his second reason that he there gives, than his first, and that is, because the most material parts had been already confessed.  
To conclude this, when the Traitors did accuse their Confessors, either they did this sincerely, and because compelled by their Conscience, or not; if not (as I have showed) than what doth the Argument signify; that if the tenderness of their Conscience did compel them to expose their own Confessors, than they would not have spared others. But if they did thus confess them sincerely and out of Conscience, than their Confessors were guilty of what these charged them with. And then let them take their choice.  
I shall now proceed to the consideration of the last Argument, by which they would endeavour to prove that it was not a Popish Plot, 
Rom. Ch. vindicated p. 64.65.  and, that not any besides the abovesaid Conspirators were concerned in this Treason, viz. that all the Catholic Lords were to have undergone the same barbarous Fate with the rest. Supposing this was true (as it is not) yet is not the Pope's Interest to be promoted and the cause of the Jesuits maintained, though the Nobility of their own way be destroyed? Was there not a time when in an intended Invasion to be carried on by force from abroad, 
Watson's Quodlibets p. 177.  and a secret Conspiracy at home, that it was not the Persons they regarded, but Interest? It was to make room, place and space for my Master, 
Proceed. p. 156. & p. 249.  said the Duke of Medina. And might not this be the case in 1605, as well as it was in 88? And so their Religion be thereby settled, and place and space made for the Master of Rome, as well as Spain, and Authority and Power gained to the Society; it is no matter though the Innocent perish with the Nocent, and Friends as well as Foes fall by the same Stroke. This was foreseen in the present Conspiracy,▪ and when it was made a case of Conscience by Catesby, it was resolved in the affirmative by Garnet, 
Proceed. p. 165.  that for the good and promoting of the Catholic Cause against Heretics (the necessity of time and occasion so requiring) it was lawful among many Nocents to destroy and take away some Innocents' also. So that it might be a popish Plot, though the Catholic Lords, and all the Catholic Lords were to perish with the other.  
But notwithstanding what these Writers do say, that the Catholic Lords, and all the Catholic Lords, were to be thus barbarously dealt with: yet we shall find that this is a great mistake in matter of Fact also. The Confession of Thomas Winter (if they had read it) would have informed them otherwise; for, whilst we were in the Vault, 
Proceedings. p. 54.  we discoursed, saith he, what Lords we should save from the Parliament; which was first agreed in general; as many as we could that were Catholics, or so disposed: but after we descended to particulars. And Sir Everard Digby doth give a clear account of this matter; I dare not, saith he, 
Paper 9  take that course I could, to make it appear less odious; for divers were to have been brought out of the danger, which now would rather hurt them than otherwise. I do not think there would have been three worth saving that should have been lost. To this purpose one of them that was privy to it took the way of writing to the Lord Monteagle. Other Lords, as the hour drew on, might be admonished of it, 
Eudaem. Apol p. 240.  or called off (as an Author of theirs saith they were to be); or perhaps such a kind of Letter might have been thought of also, as the Author of the Catholic Apology hath drawn up to serve upon such an occasion; 
Cath. Apol. p. 408.  and which he thinks would certainly have kept the Person, to whom it was written, at home. By one, or the other, or the like ways, we see that care was taken to secure all those that would be true, or whom they could presume would be assisting to them. And when this was done, if the Author of the Catholic Apology, that tells us that the Catholic Noblemen then were not only considerable, 
Cath. Apol. p. 400.  but the considerablest of the Nation; the first Marquis (there being at that time no Duke but the late King) the first Earl, and the first Baron being of that Profession; If after these, and the four other Lords he there names, he had filled up the Catalogue of all those that were professedly of his Religion (besides what were so disposed) we might by deducting of three (according to Sir Everard's calculation) have told him the number and quality of the Noblemen that were to be saved; and by doing so, have showed him that it was so far from being true, that all the Catholic Lords were to have been destroyed, as he saith, that scarcely one of them would have undergone that Fate; and so it might be a Popish Plot, and an universal Popish Plot, without a contradiction or a riddle, notwithstanding what that Author hath said thereupon.  
As for what he there saith, that a Plot is looked upon as general, when a good number of the chief of a Party are intrigued in the Design. I grant that such a Plot is general (if with them men of other states and degrees generally join with them in it) but yet it may be a general Plot of a Party, and the Nobility not be intrigued in it; and they may be intrigued, and yet it not be known. For what more common then to send a Forlorn-Hope before, that are willing to venture their Lives and Fortunes, and who if they perish, perish alone? What more common than for persons to have such intimations given them of a Plot as are sufficient to prepare them; and again to give such intimations of their consent and approbation, as shall be sufficient to assure the undertakers of their assistance; such as shall secure the one, if it should happen to be discovered; and warrant the other to go on with the greater resolution? What more common than to have a general notice of this, and to be willingly ignorant of the particulars (as hath been already observed?) And so the Lords might know of a Design in general; but that this was to be begun by blowing up the Parliament-House, it was not necessary they should know; because they were to be kept out of that danger; nor fit to know that they might not, if it miscarried, be brought into another. What more ordinary than to raise and join Contributions, and covertly to convey it, so that it shall serve the Cause without hurting themselves? And though this was not then publicly known, yet afterward their Relations and Descendants found that it must be by some such secret ways that their Estates were broken and impaired; and I am assured that some of them (as Captain Dingly told a relation of his, whom he believed for that reason, and others to be concerned in it) did smell of Gunpowder some years after, if not to this day. And if this may be (as often it is) than a good number of the chief of the Party might be intrigued in the Design, and little knowledge of it come abroad then, or down to us now.  
The Parliament than was to receive a terrible blow, 
Proceedings p. 29.  and yet they should not see who hurt them; for there was no appearance of any stir; as the person that wrote the Letter to the Lord Monteagle saith. 
Ibid. p. 124.  There were indeed store of great Horses bought up, and Powder, etc. conveyed secretly to their Friends; but at the same time they were wished not to stir, until they heard further; as I have showed from watson's Information. It was somewhat strange, that when the roman-catholics were prepared for Tumult, 
Abboti Antil. p. 149. a and 165. b Eudaem. Apol.  and hardly to be restrained by the Jesuits themselves, as Garnet in his Letters complains; and were neither then wanting in Courage or Force, as another saith; that yet they should be so profoundly quiet about that time; and that the Broils that were in Wales in the May before, should be so easily and suddenly hushed, 
Proceed. p. 168.  as not to be observed by the Government. 
Antilog. p. 138. b.  But this showed the diligence and dexterity of those that were concerned, and we have the reason of it: For Garnet wrote to the Pope that a strict Order might come for the staying all Commotions of the Catholics here in England, 
Antilog. p. 138. b  intending to set their whole rest of the Romish Cause on the Powder Plot, as Faux confessed, and lull us asleep in security in respect of their dissembling quietness and conformity, 
Proceed. p. 168.  as Sir Edward Coke saith. The Jesuits by the management of Gerard, had been the means of bringing Watson's Treason to light, 
Mori. Hest. p. 325 , and him to the Gallows (as More doth own) thereby at once revenging themselves upon him for all the stories that he had told of them in Print; 
Antilog. p. 160. b  and also securing to themselves some respect and reputation from the Government for their seeming fidelity: And to this they added all their endeavours to keep things quiet, and themselves by that means free from suspicion. But now that all this was but a piece of Art, appears;  
(1.) Because all the while, even for twenty months' space, Garnet kept Catesby's practices secret; which, by his own confession, 
Ibid. P. 137. b & 138.  he did assuredly believe to be of very destructive consequence.  
(2.) Because by the Pope's Letters to him it appears, though care was taken as to general Commotions, yet as to particulars it was then said, there needed no prohibition, because what was said about generals would suffice. 
Ibid 139. b  The meaning of which, will appear from what Sir E. Digby saith, Paper 9  
(3.) It appears that the Commotions in Wales were rather hushed than disheartened, and rather put off than brought to an end. For we find, after the discovery of the Powder Plot, and the defeating that part of the Design, the Traitors had an expectation of assistance from Wales; and therefore Digby and Catesby, etc. did write to Garnet that he would go along with them thither, where they might expect help; 
Antilog. p. 149. a & 163. b  and use his interest with theirs to make an Insurrection, and to put that fire, which was before cautiously raked up, into an open flame.  
If we now reflect upon what hath been said in this Section, and consider the Design itself, which, in the beginning might be managed by few, yet, in the process of it, did require the help of many to take it up, to back and carry it on. If we further consider the persons at first engaged in it; who were not only Men of experience, but also experienced in the same way, and would not venture upon such a Design without a sufficient Force. If we lastly consider the Provisions that were made for such a Design; together with the other Circumstances relating to it, it will appear that what the Author of the Catholic Apology saith, 
Cath. Apol. p. 402.  viz. that it is impossible that the Catholic Party should be engaged in it, is so far from being true; that it may with much greater assurance be affirmed, to be impossible that the Catholic Party should not have been involved in it.   

SECT. III. Those that fled and suffered for it, were really guilty.  
THe flight of Persons upon a Charge and Accusation, though it is not always a certain sign of Gild, yet is so generally presumed to be so, upon the supposition that he that flies is conscious to himself of being criminal; that it's a Question always asked upon Trial, Whether the Person fled for it? But because this is only a general and not an universal mark of Gild, I shall not take the advantage of it, but leave that for another and more certain Evidence, which is, Good and sufficient Testimony. 
Hist. 1605▪  Thuanus relates that many were banished or fled upon this account; and that when some of them were courteously received by Dominick Wilkes, than Governor of Calais, and were pitied by him as they were thus forced to an Exile; one of them smartly replied, that is the least part of our grief; but that which doth afflict us indeed, is that we could not accomplish so brave and good a Design. These were so daring as to own and glory in it; but, on the contrary, the Jesuits, Gerard and Greenwel, when it miscarried, and brought the ill opinion of the world upon them and their Society, did disown it, and would neither be said to encourage it or know it, however they might have been pleased with it, if it had succeeded. And therefore it will be necessary to show that they were really as guilty, though they fled from the pursuit of Justice, as the others that were taken and suffered by it: But because much of this story will fall in with Garnet's, I shall choose rather to begin with his.  
That any of the Laymen that suffered upon this account were not really guilty, I think no body undertakes to prove. Only More doth offer somewhat to lessen the Gild of Sir Everard Digby, 
Mori Hist. p. 312.  making him to say at his Trial, that he was guilty only of concealing the Plot, but otherwise he had done and conspired nothing. But this Account is partly imperfect, and partly false. Sir Everard indeed upon his Apprehension, did deny, with solemn Protestations and Execrations, 
Antilog. p. 110. a.  that he was privy to the Plot of Powder; but being herein confronted by the Testimony of Faux, 
Proceedings P. 140.  who confessed that Sir Everard told him when he was at his House, that he was afraid the Powder was dank, etc. he at last did acknowledge it, and upon his Trial confessed the Indictment; 
Ibid. p. 127.  which none of the rest did.  
By which instance, we may conceive what kind of dealing we are to expect when we come to the case of the Persons of their own Order, when the Jesuits write after this rate about the case of those that are not. For of them also we shall find several concerned; as Father Creswell Legier Jesuit in Spain, Father Baldwin Legier in Flanders, Parsons at Rome, Garnet Provincial in England, Gerrard, Tesmond [alias Greenway,] Hammond, Hall and others, who are known to have dealt and passed through the whole Action, as Sir Edward Coke saith. But amongst those, Garnet, 
Proceeds p. 96.  Gerard, Tesmond, Hammond and Hall were more immediately concerned; and Garnet and Hall were taken and Executed for it. But, notwithstanding, their Trial was in the face of the World; and Garnet's at Guild-Hall in the open Court, before five Earls, three of the chief Judges, 
Widdrington Append. p. 141.  and the Lord Mayor of London; Notwithstanding all the proofs produced, and a fair Hearing of whatever the Prisoners could say for themselves; 
Tort. Torti. p. 291.  Notwithstanding they were tried and cast by a Jury of impartial Persons, and such as they, nor any else, could have any exception against; 
Antil. p. 9  yet they shall be said to suffer as Martyrs, and pulverariae conjuraritionis obtentu, 
Alegambe Biblioth. Index Martyr. An. 1606.  upon the pretence of the Powder-Treason, as one saith: To be accused through envy and malice, and condemned by a very unjust Judgement, as saith another. 
Mori Hist. p. p. 312, & 334.  But with how little Truth or pretence all this is said, will be evident, if we consider,  
(1.) That they knew of this Plot in Confession at least. This Garnet more particularly pleaded for himself, and this is the chief Plea insisted upon by his Apologists. And to make this Plea the more effectual, they speak much of the sacredness and inviolableness of that Seal and Sacrament (as they call it) which ought not to be broken, or the secrets of it betrayed for the avoiding of any mischief how great soever, as one saith; or, the saving Christianity from ruin, 
Eudaem. Apol. p. 337.  as saith Cath. Apol. This (saith the former) is of divine Right, 
Ibid. 336.  and if God had not thus secured it, he would be Carnifex, & fidem falleret; he would be a Murderer, and breaker of his Faith. 
Proceedings p. 215.  This Garnet did offer in his own behalf, that he was bound to keep the secrets of Confessions, etc. and when asked by the Earl of Nottingham, 
Casaub. Epist. ad Ducaeum p. 137.  if one confessed this day to him, that to morrow morning he meant to kill the King with a Dagger, if he must conceal it? answered, that he must conceal it. Now, if this be true, what a case is the World in, that when a Design is laid to destroy the Royal Family, the flower of the Nobility and Gentry, and thousands of persons besides; a Priest shall be obliged more to secrecy upon Confession, than to a discovery, notwithstanding all the mischief that shall thereby ensue. A principle so much contrary to the peace of the World and the welfare of mankind, that I am confident if it was turned against themselves they would be the first that should condemn it; and that if such a Plot had been undertaken and carried on against the Pope and the whole College of Cardinals, 
Widdringtoni Appen. p. 149.  (as Widdrington hath the Case) to send them out of the World by the like means, (as this was): neither his Holiness would have condemned the Confessor if he had discovered it; or have commended him, if he had concealed it upon this reason, and thought himself obliged to him for his fidelity that way. Without doubt they would all say, 
Proceed. p. 186.  as Garnet at last did— I must needs confess, said he, that the Laws made against such concealing are very good and just, for it is not fit the safety of a Prince should depend upon any other man's Conscience. And if the Laws are good that make them guilty of Treason, who do (though upon account of Confession) conceal it, than those that thus do conceal it are far from being innocent, or fit to be enrolled amongst the number of Martyrs.  
But supposing it was only in Confession that they had any knowledge of it, yet there are several cases excepted and which it is lawful for them to divulge it in. Such a case is Heresy; according to that known verse amongst the Casuists, Haeresis est crimen, quod nec confessio celat. Thus Dominicus Soto determines, 
Tort. Torti. p. 295.  (who is rigidior custodia Sigilli, as Bishop Andrews saith of him) Such crimes are not to be concealed, but immediately to be disclosed, 
Soto de rat. deteg. Secret. man. 3. Q. 4. Cons. 2.  quod plurimùm timendum est in crimine Haeresis, because there is very much danger in case of Heresy.  
Such again is any crime that tends to the damage of a Community. Such again are all those crimes which are of pernicious consequence in themselves, and that are only in intention, but not committed by the Penitent.  
Such again are those where the Confession is not by way of Contrition, but Advice.  
In these and the like Cases the Casuists of their own Church have accounted it lawful and necessary to disclose them; 
Tort. Torti. p. 291, 292.  and accordingly these secrets of Confession have often been divulged; as hath been shown by Bishop Andrews upon this occasion. 
Cath. Apol. Paper 418.  So far is the Author of the Catholic Apology from speaking truth, when he saith that this Sacrament [of Confession] is of such reverence among us (unless he mean the Jesuits and some late Writters) that we cannot lawfully disclose a secret known by it, 
p. 426.  though 'twere to save Christianity from ruin. And so far is Dr. Stillingfleet from having nothing but Confidence, Malice, etc. to drive him on, when he saith, their Casuists acknowledge, that Heresy told in Confession may be revealed.  
But; further supposing this was told in Confession, yet the Confessor is to dissuade the Penitent from it; 
Cath. Apol. p. 418.  (as the Catholic Apology at least seems to own,) and it is to be supposed, that if he is not to be dissuaded; yet, then to divert the mischief, the Confessor may and aught to discover, (for else he leaves the Case as he finds it, with respect to the Person or Persons concerned) provided, say their Casuists, that whilst he discovers the Crime, he doth conceal the Criminal.  
Now if all this be true, that a Secret may be communicated in Confession, and the Confessor not sin in revealing it; then what will it signify that the Gunpowder-Treason was discovered in Confession, if the matter confessed was of that kind as would make it lawful, fit, and necessary to be revealed? And certainly, next to the saving Christianity from ruin, there can scarcely be a greater reason for breaking the Seal of that Sacrament (as they call it) than that a Royal Family, the Nobility (in great part) and Gentry, etc. of a Nation would have been by one blow destroyed. And yet this was patiently heard, and the Penitent not so much as really dissuaded. For all that Garnet could say was, that he did oblige Greenwel to desist, 
Proceedings p. 216.  and that he hoped that he had so done: and that he went unto Warwickshire with a purpose to dissuade Mr. Catesby; 
Antilog. p. 143 b.  though he knew Catesby would not come thither till the day after the Blow was given; as hath been before observed.  
(2.) But all this while this is far otherwise, it being very notorious that this Plot was discovered out of Confession to Garnet and Greenwell, etc. as will appear from the account which Garnet himself gives of it, (as far as he was concerned.) In which he delivers his mind very uncertainly. Sometimes he saith, it was in Confession. Sometimes, he saith it was out of Confession, but it was with relation unto Confession; Sometimes it was by way of advice. 
Tortura Torti. p. 285.  Again, Let him be asked, what he thought of Greenwell's intention in it? he saith, that perhaps Greenwell had no thoughts of Confession, but might discover it to him under a lesser Seal and Obligation of Secrecy. Now what can a person more discover himself by, than that in so solemn a thing as Confession, and such an extraordinary case as was then revealed unto him, he yet knew not, if we may believe him, what the person confessing did intend, or in what way he himself received it; whether it was communicated to him as a Friend for advice, or as to a Confessor for the disburthing of the Conscience. But if we further inquire how this was discovered to him, we are still further to seek; It was first walking in the Field, 
Ibid. p. 296.  and afterward what they had frequent Conference about; 
Antilog. p. 140. b.  as about the way of doing it, the progress in it, and the course they were to take after the first blow was given. 
Widdrington App. p. 137.  This plainly proves it to be matter of Consultation rather than Confession; and that it was rather what he was pleased with, than what he sought to hinder. So that the whole story about Greenwel's Confession to Garnet, and Catesby's Confession to Greenwel, seems to be no other than fabula formalis, a story of Garnet's own invention, as he in his private Letters doth acknowledge.  
Lastly, If we would understand the Case, let us follow him to his death; and yet there we are at a loss, where he saith, what he knew in particulars, was in Confession; and yet when minded by the Recorder, 
Procee p. 226.  that the King had it under his own hand, that Greenway [or Greenwell] told him of this not as a fault, but by way of Consultation, etc. he answered, whatsoever was under his hand was true. To which he added, that inasmuch as he disclosed not the things he knew, he confessed himself justly condemned, etc. From which it appears, that either he thought it was lawful upon good Reasons to divulge what he heard in Confession, or else what was discovered to him was not in Confession.  
(3.) But this was so far from being discovered to the Jesuits in Confession, that it was by them that the Consciences of the scrupulous were satisfied: As that of Catesby by Garnet; that of Bats by Greenwell; that of Littleton by Hall; and all of them at Holbeach, as far as Absolution for the Fact could do it, by Hammond. That Catesby was herein guided by the resolution and opinion of Garnet; both the Case he put to him, and the satisfaction that he (upon the Provincial's answer to him) gave to the rest, of the lawfulness of it, will sufficiently prove. The Catholic Apology doth say, 
Cath. Apol. p. 422.  that nothing is more false than that Garnet should determine that the Innocent and Guilty might lawfully in this Plot be destroyed together, if it were for the greater good; and takes it upon the word of Father More and the other Apologists, that Catesby pretending to go a Soldier into the Low-Countries, did propose only what might be done in a just War, when in blowing up a Mine the Innocent would suffer as well as the Nocent? It is well he shifts it off to them, since this Person of Honour knows better, and cannot but be sensible that the Records of a Nation, and the proceedings of a Court of Justice in England, are much more to be heeded than a company of partial Apologists.  
But as it is plainly affirmed all along in the Proceedings; so it is otherwise very evident, that this Case was not put by Catesby to Garnet, nor understood by Garnet himself, with respect to any War, or Employment, that Catesby pretended to have in it, in the Netherlands. For (1.) if it had been so, Garnet would most certainly have pleaded after that manner, and not as he did; I thought, said Garnet, it had been an idle question, 
Ibid. p. 188.  though afterwards I did verily think, he intended something that was not good; Here is not a word of a War, or of the Low-Countries, or of his going thither. Nay, Garnet saith expressly, only Mr. Catesby asked him in general the question. But (2.) if this had been the case, and that it was so propounded by Catesby, as they would have it, yet what needed so great a privacy, that he should come to Garnet by way of secret Confession? Since the Case, as they now dress it up, is what might be put in any place or company. 
Tort. Torti, p. 282.  (3.) If the Case was such what needed Catesby to be so solicitous in it; and after the first resolution of it by Garnet to come again upon the same business? 
Antilog. p. 137. b.  (4.) Especially considering that Garnet knew very well, if Catesby had put it after that manner, 
Proceed. p. 170.  that he was not in earnest; for there was another reason for his pretence of obtaining a Regiment, and going to Flanders, as hath been before observed. (5.) It's a sign that the Case was not so put by Catesby; since it is acknowledged by Garnet, that he did verily think, 
Eudaem. Apol p. 284.  that he in that question intended something that was not good. Now how could he well discern so much from thence, if Catesby had pretended only scruple of Conscience about what he might lawfully do, now he was going to serve in the Wars. The question if put after that manner hath in it nothing but what is fair, and gives no reason to suspect any thing that is not good; and therefore its likely, to avoid the objection that might be made against this way of framing the Case, it is that More adds, that Garnet discovered that Catesby had some great Design by frequent converse with him. 
Mori Hist. p. 325.  And that indeed is also true, and it is as true that the Case was never so put under the disguise of a War. For lastly, Garnet himself doth acknowledge, 
Casaub. Epist ad Ducaeum. p. 99  that Catesby in his name and by his authority did satisfy the rest of the lawfulness of the Fact. Now it cannot be supposed that Catesby did not understand Garnet, from whose side he never was, as they say; 
Tort. Torti. p. 282.  or that he should abuse his friend that trusted him above all the rest, from the knowledge and experience he had of him. It's certain that when Rookwood made it a matter of Conscience to take away so much blood, 
Proceed. p. 105.  Catesby replied, that he was resolved and that by good Authority (as coming from the Superior of the Jesuits) that in Conscience it might be done, yea though it were with the destruction of many Innocents', 
Proceed. p. 167.  rather than that the Action should quail. In like manner was Keys satisfied. So Sir Everard Digby doth say; For my keeping it secret, 
Paper. 1.  it was caused by certain belief that those which were best able to judge of the lawfulness of it, had been acquainted with it, and given way unto it. And of this we have a clear proof from him. 
Proceedings p. 168.  For whereas there was a Breve obtained from the Pope by Garnet, for quieting some broils amongst the Papists in Wales, in May. 1605. (or rather upon the pretence of such broils, 
Eudaem. Apol p. 255.  as Eudaemon would have it) which some now would make us believe were to forbid all Insurrections and Conspiracies whatsoever, and which it seems some did then so understand; we are told the meaning of it, 
Paper 9  in Sir Everard's Papers, who writes thus: Before I knew any thing of this Plot, I did ask Mr. Farmer [i.e. Garnet] what the meaning of the Pope's Brief was; he told me that they were not (meaning the Priests) to undertake or procure Stirs: but yet they would not hinder any, neither was it the Pope's mind they should, that should be undertaken for Catholic Good. And he presently adds, This answer with Mr. Catesby's proceedings with him and me, gave me absolute belief that the matter in general was approved, though every particular was not known: By which means he came to so great satisfaction in it, 
Paper 1.  that he saith, I could give unanswerable reasons for the good this would have done the Catholic Cause.  
But Garnet was not alone (though his Opinion and Judgement in the case was of greatest Authority) for others also did follow him in the same practice; So Greenwel, (whose true name was Tesmond, 
(a) Tort. Torti. p. 281.  but who abroad went under the name of Beaumond) 
(b) Mori Hist. p. 336.  did satisfy Bates (Mr. Catesby's Servant) when he feared the unlawfulness of the Action, assuring him that it was no offence to conceal it, nor sin to do it for a good Cause. 
(c) Proceed. p. 105.   
They tell us 
(d) Mori Hist. p. 314.  that Bats recanted of this Information (for it was he that accused Greenwel.) But (1.) that is no credit to them; for in that Letter, which he is said to have written to his Confessor, he recants also that he had seen Greenwel and Garnet, which he doth there declare to be true in itself 
(e) Ibid p. 315. . (2.) This report was spread of him, at the first, when all could bear witness of the falseness of it; he not recanting to, nor at his death 
(f) Proceed. p. 221. Antilog. p. 4. b & 162. Proceed. p. 166.   
So Gerard did absolve and give the Sacrament to the five first of the Conspirators. The Author of the Catholic Apology 
(g) Cath. Apol. p. 423. Mori. Hist. p. 282.  doth say that he did deny both by a public writing in which he called God to witness, that he knew not of the Plot, no not so much as in Confession; and also upon Oath at Rome when examined by the General of his Order. He did also saith another appeal to his familiar Friend Sir Everard Digby. But in confutation of this, we have the Confession of Faux and Thomas Winter, the only survivers of the five that did thus receive the Sacrament of Gerard, 
Antilog. p. 159. b  and were absolved by him: whom though they did deny at the first to name, yet did afterward accuse him of it; and that he was thus charged by some, Sir Everard saith, 
Paper 5.  he was told. As for his Appeal to Sir Everard, he knew that he might do it with safety and confidence, since that Gentleman had again and again satisfied them, that he would not confess his knowledge of any Priest, 
Ibid.  nor of Him above any. And if he could work thus upon another person to protest and deny, even to the death, it may well be supposed that he himself was not without those principles which be had furnished another with; nor would be wanting in the use of them, when his own life and reputation, and the honour of his Religion was concerned to have it remain a Secret. And this also is no new thing; for we find Fitz-Herbert taking the same course for his own vindication, 
Antilog. p. 123. a.  in a charge of the like Nature.  
Hammond the Jesuit is another, whom we find concerned in this capacity, who did absolve the Conspirators at the house of Rob. Winter, 
Proceedings P. 123.  when they were in actual Rebellion: And for which the Apologist hath nothing else to say, but who can tell whether Hammond did not oblige them to lay down their Arms before he did absolve them; or whether they did not bring such Arguments for continuing in them, as might render it probable, 
Eudaem. Apol. p. 273. etc.  and then he was bound to absolve them?  
But as to the former, it is certainly otherwise; for they not only continued in the same posture of Rebellion after absolution, which they were in before; But also Hammond advised Henry Morgan to defend the Cause to the utmost before he absolved him. 
Antilog. p. 154. b  Which is further confirmed by what Stephen Littleton did say; who when asked whether he was absolved for the Fact, or had his Conscience satisfied by any about it, 
Ibid. p. 155.  viz. at that time; answered, that he would rather die than reveal the secrets of that matter. Which doth imply that he had been thus absolved, and was confirmed.  
As to the latter, viz. the Doctrine of a probable opinion, it serves rather to condemn than excuse them; for if the opinion of a Doctor, or their own (and the good of the Cause shall serve to procure both) may make an Opinion probable, then Jac. Clemen s, and Ravilliac, and all the Regicides in the World, may be defended, and defend themselves. But yet, even this will not salve the reputation of Hammond; for Rookwood believed his concealment of this Treason to be a Sin, and confessed it so to him: but he absolved him from all his Sins notwithstanding, without taking notice of this particular.  
Rookwood thought it to be unlawful, and yet Hammond absolved him, as if he never had so thought.  
Another of the Jesuits is Hall, or Oldcorn, who was privy to it, and did satisfy Humphrey Littleton, that did begin to suspect the lawfulness of the Plot, and to think God was not pleased with it from the disaster Catesby, etc. met with; 
Proceedings p. 172.  But Hall told him that we must not judge the cause by the event, and gave him several instances to confirm it. 
Antilog. p. 150. b  This Humphrey Littelton did confess. But saith the Apologist, he did at his Execution beg pardon of Hall for it. 
Eudaem. Apol p. 270.   
But if he did, he must ask his pardon for what was true; for Hall himself in the substance of it did confess what Littelton accused him of. But how could that be, 
Antilog. p. 150. b  that he should beg pardon of him at the place of execution; when, though they suffered the same day at Worcester, 
Ibid. p. 151. b.  yet not at the same time, and Littelton was dead before Hall came thither.  
4. The Jesuits did not only satisfy the Consciences of others and absolve them; but also were parties in the Treason themselves. I shall not here insist upon what Smith, the Bishop of Chalcedon said of Gerard, that he boasted that he had largely sweat with working in the Mine; because I find it not upon Record. But there are several things laid to their charge that will sufficiently prove, that they were actually concerned in it. As, 
Antilog. p. 160. a   
(1.) We find that at the first beginning they were present at their most private Consultations; 
Proceedings p. 113.  and so intimate in that juncture was Gerard with Catesby, that he lodged with him in Percy's house, as Faux confessed.  
(2) We find that some of them administered the Oath of Secrecy to the Conspirators; 
Proceedings p. 113.  So Gerard to Catesby, etc. and Greenwel to Bates.  
(3.) They were also busy in buying up store of Horses and Arms; and Gerard was more particularly employed herein, 
Ibid. p. 124.  as he had skill, and pretended to teach the riding of the great Horse. 
Antilog. p. 160. b   
(4.) That they had frequent consultations about it; 
Proceed. p. 167 & 169.  as Garnet with Catesby and Tresham about the strength of the Catholics: Greenwel with Garnet about a Protector. And Garnet, 
Ibid. p. 125.  Gerard and Greenwel with Sir Everard Digby, 
Antilog. p. 160. a  etc. for they seem to be the Three whom Sir Everard is so careful to conceal; and whom he therefore is so careful to conceal, 
Pap. 5. Compared with pap. 3.  because of some particular charge that might be brought against them, for what was said or done when together with him; as may be collected from his Papers,  
(5.) When the Conspirators were in Arms, Greenwel came to them from Garnet, 
Proceedings. p. 216, 218.  and so had Garnet come likewise, but for fear his order might irreparably suffer by his appearance. Greenwel went from them to raise a Party and make an Insurrection. And Hammond continued with them.  
Now if to satisfy the scrupulous and absolve the guilty, and to oblige to Secrecy; if Consulting, Advising, Assisting, and accompanying with the Traitors will bring the Priests into the number; then they will be guilty. And it's not all their own Declarations, or Apologies written by others on their behalf, will make them innocent, as long as such a Charge remains upon Record against them.  
It is no wonder then, 
Casaub. ad Ducaeum. Proceedings p. 173.  that Garnet after all his confidence, should profess that he would give all the world to clear his Innocency; and that he that hoped at the first to escape for Want of proof; should have nothing to say for himself, 
Proceedings p. 196, & 174.  when he was overwhelmed, as he said, with so great a Cloud of Witnesses.  
From which evidence, as he did at last confess, what they could from other proof charge upon him; so from his own confession given under his hand, he was, when he would have strayed from the path of Truth at his death, forced into it again by the admonition of the Recorder then present. For a little to palliate his case and clear himself, he said, that what he knew in particulars was in Confession, which was contrary to what he before had confessed in four points; as the Recorder then showed; 
Proceedings p. 225.  and how he could thus equivocate or worse, and yet behave himself like a faithful Servant of Jesus Christ at his death, 
P. 420.  as the Author of the Catholic Apology saith, all mankind, but themselves, cannot, I believe, understand.   

SECT. IV. This Conspiracy was purely upon the account of Religion.  
AS our Adversaries before have done what they could to cast off the odium of this Conspiracy from the Party in general, and from the Jesuits in particular, by making a few Gentlemen only and their dependants concerned in it: So they use as much Art to clear their Religion from the guilt of it; being sensible that if this be found faulty, the others are not to be defended, but the whole Party must fall under censure. Therefore they labour might and main to acquit themselves well herein, and tell us that as these persons were few in number, so they did proceed upon discontent, and not upon the score of Religion.  
Sometimes they plead, 
Proceed. p. 127. Eudaem. Apol. p. 233. Ibid. p. 290.  the King did before his coming into England give them good hopes of the exercise of their Religion, which when deceived in, they were exasperated. Sometimes their Persecutions were so great, that they almost hated life itself for their sake. Or as the Author of the Catholic Apology words it; 
Cath. Apol. p. 416.  That which drove these Gentlemen into this wickedness, was the want of Christian patience, or a despair of any ease by this King from Queen Elizabeth's cruel and horrid Laws, etc.  
Now supposing (1.) that thus it was, that the King had before promised favour to them, and instead of that had permitted the horrid and cruel Laws, as he calls them, to have their course; is this sufficient to excuse their cursed Design, or to prove that Religion was not concerned in it? Was it upon any other account (if we grant this) than Religion, when they hoped for Toleration; and was it not Religion that put them upon Rebellion, because they had not that Toleration?  
But (2.) indeed there was no such reason for their Conspiracy; for they had no such assurances from the King. Such a report was spread abroad by themselves, as Watson doth acknowledge; 
Antilog. p. 137. b  but with what truth will appear not only from Watson's Confession, who two days before his death protested upon his Soul to the Earl of Northampton, that he could never draw the smallest comfort from him in those degrees; 
Proceedings p. 137.  but also from Watson's Treason, who would never have attempted that, if he had been satisfied of the King's good intentions towards those of his Religion. It is not unlikely but that the King, who after his coming in did receive them freely and favourably, might before treat them after the same manner; but how far it was from any promise, Watson further declares, 
Ibid.  I could never draw more from the King, saith he, than that he would have the Catholics apprehend, that as he was a stranger to this state, so till he under stood in all points how those matters stood, he would not promise favour any way  
But how far the King was from affording them any such favours, as they pretend, is further declared in a Memorandum in the Star-Chamber; For some of the Puritans having spread a rumour, that the King intended to grant a Toleration to Papists, the Lords severally declared, how the King was discontented with the said false rumour, and had made but the day before a Protestation to them, that he never intended it, 
Crook's Reports. An. 2d Jac.  and that he would spend the last drop of blood in his body before he would do it, and prayed that before any of his Issue should maintain any other Religion than what he truly professed and maintained, that God would take them out of the World. As false also, and less ground is there for that of their Persecution. For he was so far from it that he gave honour at his first coming to many of them, 
Proceed. p. 132.  and did admit all without distinction to his presence upon just occasion of access, as the Earl of Northampton shows; 
Casaub. ad Ducaeum p. 75.  and took away the Mulcts that were laid upon them. And in his first Speech in Parliament Mar. 19 1603 the King did make a proposal of clearing the Laws of such interpretations as might tend to the hurt of the innocent as well as the guilty, as he saith; 
K. James' Works. p. 491.  which Speech was made after the Treason of Watson was discovered; 
Tortura Torti. p. 85.  that not provoking the King to change his behaviour toward any other of them than those that were Confederates in it. 
Suar. Def. l. 6. c. 10 de Persec. Angl.  So that if we truly inquire into the case, unless Lenity and Favour is Persecution, we shall hardly find what may be so called, And so much indeed doth Suarez say; that King James' kindnesses (inasmuch as they proceeded from political reasons) may be well esteemed part of their Persecution.  
But (3.) There could be no such reason for this Conspiracy; for they had laid the foundation of it, and were carrying it on before the King was settled in his Throne. This Watson confessed; and it's also manifest; for Christopher Wright was dispatched into Spain to engage that King's assistance immediately upon Queen Elizabeth's death, 
Torture. Torti. p. 83.  and the Powder Treason itself was form in the first year of King James' Reign.  
We see than they had no such provocation given them as is pretended, and that if they had, it doth not at all infer that they engaged upon this Design not upon the account of Religion. But if we should grant that they had such a provocation, and that the provocation and Religion did not go together in it: Yet we have other reasons to show, that it was upon a religious account that this was undertaken, and that I shall make evident, 

(1.) From the Principles which they went upon.  
(2.) From their own Declaration.    
From their Principles. As,  
(1.) They held that an Heretical Prince might and ought to be deposed; 
Proceed. p. 38.  So Faux said he was moved to this; because the King was not his lawful Sovereign, or the Anointed of God, in respect he was an Heretic.  
(2.) That the Pope had sufficient power, by virtue of his Supremacy, to depose such; This was Catesbye's reason, for saith he, if the Pope's Breves were of force to keep him [King James] out, they are also of no less Authority to thrust him out.  
(3.) That it was lawful for the good of the Church, and the furtherance of the Catholic Cause to kill and to destroy; This was the reason upon which Catesby and all the rest were satisfied; and from whence Sir Everard did with a great confidence affirm, 
Paper. 4.  I could give unanswerable reasons for the good that this would have done for the Catholic Cause. Which it seems he was furnished with from a Latin Book that he met with, perhaps Delrio. 
Paper 8.  If these and the like be not principles of their Religion, than we are to seek for them; and if these are the Principlss upon which they were satisfied, than it was the Cause of Religion that they fought in.  
(2.) But if this will not do, let us attend to their own Declarations. I was moved hereunto, said Faux, 
Paper 1.  only for Religion and Conscience sake, the King not being my lawful Sovereign, etc. So Sir Everard Digby, no other cause drew me to hazard my Fortune and Life, 
K. James' Speech. Proceed. p. 10.  but Zeal to God's Religion. From all which we have reason to say with King James, that it cannot be denied, that it was the only blind Superstition of their errors in Religion, that led them to this desperate device. And must think the Author of the Catholic Apology let fall a great Truth, though against his own mind, that when Dr. Stillingfleet had asserted, that the Plotters motives were from their Religion: doth reply, ' 'tis as true that the Plot had its rise from Clem. 8. Breves. For so it had in a great measure, as I have before showed.   

SECT. V.  
THey never gave to the World any real and good satisfaction of their abhorrency of this bloody Design. 
Cath. Apol. p. 427.  The Catholic Apology doth tell us, that Cardinal Bellarmin doth express the Treason, not only by the name of Horrid, but also adds, I excuse not the Fact, I abominate King-killing, I detest Conspiracies. And presently adds of his own, Did ever Writer, whether Priest or Layman, Englishman or Stranger, own the real Plotters not to be Villains? But the Question is, First, who are those he calls real Plotters? not the Jesuits, or hardly Catesby, whom they do so much applaud, not only for his Parts but his Piety. Again, what doth he mean by owning the real Plotters to be Villains? Is it by calling them by hard names? is it that they do abominate the thing in words of the highest detestation? All this may be, and hath been done by more than Bellarmin or this Author, and yet it is not good satisfaction. Is it by writing Apologies and Supplications? that was done in 1603 and 1604, just whilst the Powder-Treason was in its agitation. 
K. James' Works p. 463.  How shall we give credit to them? when the Principles these Persons went upon were never disowned to the World, upon any sufficient Authority; and the Persons that escaped from public Justice, were cherished, and those that suffered by it to this day, honoured. They can hardly forbear extolling even the chief of the Conspirators [Catesby] to the Heavens, 
Eudaem. Apol. p. 4.  as a Man very eminent for great endowments of mind, 
Ibid. p. 275.  and an incredible sweetness of temper. Nay, the whole pack of them, setting aside this business, were Persons of very pious minds and consciences. But when they come to the Jesuits, they spare no words nor Rhetoric to describe their Merits, 
K. James' Works p. 333.  and not contented with proclaiming their Innocency, they will canonize them for Saints, 
Widdringtoni Appendix p. 123.  and enrol them in their Catalogue of Martyrs. Thus we find they did quickly by Garnet, who in their College at Rome had his Picture set up with verus Christi Martyr, 
Alegambe Biblioth.  and his Name is still with Oldcorn (i e. Hall) to be seen in their Catalogues of Martyrs; which may be done, 
Cath. Apol. p. 421.  and is, without that great Formality of the Church, which the Catholic Apology doth speak of, and thinks to control Widdrington's Information by. But this is not enough, for at their Death are several Miracles pretended to be wrought, as they would have us believe: For Oldcorn's Bowels, 
Mori Hist. p. 335.  saith the Legend, burned sixteen days togegether, which answered the number of years that he laboured in propagating their Religion in England. And Garnet was no sooner dead, but presently his Face must be pictured to the very life by a drop of blood that fell upon a Straw. 
Antilog. p. 199. a.  Though those that did then see it (which was about 19 weeks after Garnets' Execution) could not see much in it like the Face of a Man without a great power of Fancy, 
Widdrington Appendix p. 145.  and much less any thing like the Face of Garnet more than that of another. 
Antilog. p. 200.  The Cath. Apology indeed doth tell us, that it fell in the form of a Face so exactly alike, 
Cath. Apol. p. 422.  that all men knew it that had ever seen him. But we are to receive that upon the same Credit as what he further saith, that he was quartered for an Article of Faith. But there was a further wonder in it; for this Straw which had before but a little touch of a Beard, and that had Eyes and Features hardly to be discerned, by that time it was presented to the Spanish Ambassador, 〈…〉 it grew to greater perfection; and from a bare Head, 
Mori Hist. p. 319.  in some time after, 
Eudaem. Apol. init.  it had its Head encircled with a glorious Crown; as it is described by themselves. It is no wonder then, that this Straw which could work so great a change in itself, should also propagate its kind; for within a while many others were to be seen.  
What shall we say more, 
Mori Hist. p. 335.  if the Grass where Garnet and Oldcorn last set their feet in Mr. Abington's House, grew up into the exact shape of an Imperial Crown, and remained so as not to be trod●● down by the feet of those that came thither, or eat up by the Cattle, as an Author of theirs saith? 
Bishop Hall Serm. before K. J. Sept. 19 1624.  What if there was a spring of Oil broke forth suddenly in the place where Garnet was executed? as Father David at Ypres did affirm. What if Gerard did escape by Garnets' merits, as he himself did declare. 
Mori Hist. p. 339.  After all this who but an Heretic, can believe otherwise than that he was Innocent, and died a Martyr, and is now a Saint? that it was a meritorious Act to get a Straw or a splinter of his Bones, and keep them for Relics? and that its lawful to pray, as it's said they of Louvain did, Sancte Henrice ora pro nobis. 
Widdring. App. p. 150.   
But now what if after all this ado, Garnet should confess that he sinned, 
Fowlis l. 10. c. 10.  What if he should say (as he didin his this Letter to Mrs. Vaux) that he died for Treason and not for Religion? 
Antil. p. 3. a  Then he was not Innocent, not a Martyr, and whether a Saint or no, another World must tell us. Then also we may admit the story of the Straw and others explication of it; who said, That it was no wonder to find his Face in Blood, 
Widdringt. App. p. 145.  who was a Man that did thirst after it. This is what Thuanus, as well as Widdrington, report, and I shall end with a remark that the former hath upon it; So perilous a thing is it in these times to say such things for the honour of another, as do exceed belief and the common course of Nature; for they may presently be retorted to his disparagement.  
This is the honour that they have done to the dead, and they were not without showing Favour to the living and those that made their escape, who were never called to account for it by the Pope, 
K. James' Appol. in Works p. 274.  much less punished for so scandalous and enormous business, as King James saith. Two of these Greenwel and Gerard lived in Rome; the one Greenwel, [i. e. Tesmond] the Popes Paenitentiary; 
Widdringt. Apol. p. 151.  and the other Gerard, a Confessor at Saint Peter in Rome, as Widdrington reports. 
Cath. Apol. p. ●●●.  But here the Author of the Catholic Apology thinks he hath the advantage of Dr. Stillingfleet, from what he relates of these two persons from Widdrington; for he saith the Pope's Paenitentiary and Confessor at St. Peter's are but different names for the same thing. But if it was a mistake it is to err with one of their own Church; 
MS. Cui Tit. Summar. de rebus relig. in Anglia. An. 1632.  viz. Widdrington (otherwise called Preston) who was not only of their Communion, but also a Priest, as I have heard from such as knew him in the Clinck; and I find in a MS, now in my possession, that he was one of the thirty Priests that were in Prison here in England, An. 1632.  
But what if after that stir made in this matter, they prove to be different Offices, than Greenwel might be The Pope's Penitentiary, and Gerard a Confessor some while in St. Peter's; and the Doctor not be ignorant, notwithstanding all that honourable person hath said. For how meanly soever he describes or indeed may think of it, I find the Pope's Penitentiary is an Office of respect, 
Crashaw's Mittimus, in Advertisement to the Reader.  and is called by that name, because it's called the Court of Penitents, but properly is the Court of Conscience where he officiates; This Office is usually deputed to a Cardinal, who is Major Paenitentiarius, under whom are many subordinate. This is a stated Office, and what such a person (as Greenwel) might be employed in, as subordinate, at least. But Gerard's Office was occasional, and what, though he lived in the English College at Rome, he might very well perform. For Widdrington saith, that many had seen him publicly hearing Confessions at St. Peter's.  
It is not that these are high and mighty preferments, 
Catho. Apo. Ibid.  which those Persons were advanced to, that made the Doctor revive this story, (though they are honourable enough amongst them) but that from thence we may see how little they did discourage such proceedings, as those Jesuits were here in England concerned in, when such as were equally engaged with those that suffered, should live quietly and respectfully within Rome itself, and under the very Eye of his Holiness. From all which we may well say with King James, 
King James Premonition, in his Works. p. 333.  what a large liberty is by this Doctrine left to Churchmen, to hatch or foster any treasonable attempts against Princes, I leave it to your [speaking to Monarches, etc.] consideration, since do what they will, they are accountable to none of us: nay all their treasonable practices must be works of Piety, and they being justly punished for the same, must be presently enrolled in the List of Martyrs and Saints, etc.  
If this be their practice, that Traitors are thus excused and protected; and the Principles upon which they acted not recalled or censured; We have little reason to think the World secured against practices of the like kind, when time shall serve and the necessity of things, in their estimation, so requires. And we shall not then need to vindicate the History of the Powder-Treason (as we now are forced to do) since we shall then see they will repeat it (mutatis mutandis) and we can never hope to be freed from attempts of that kind, till they quit their Principles, and the Romish Church come to be reform; which will more please us than the destruction of it, and what is by all good Protestants heartily prayed for.  
I should now have concluded, 
Compendium of the late Trials, etc. New Plot of the Papists.  but that I find there are some that do make use of the case and circumstances of the Gunpowder-Treason to overthrow the belief that is given to the present Plot, and by comparing one with another, One doth not question, as he saith, but to convince all those whose hearts are not of Pharaoh's Temper, 
New Plot. p. 13.  and whom the violence of passion has not totally deprived of all exercise of Reason, that there is no Truth in the thing, nor reason to believe any of the Evidence we have for it. Now because of the relation which, this way that they have taken, hath to the Design that I have pursued in this Treatise; I shall add somewhat by way of answer to it, and in doing so,  
1. I shall consider the case as laid down by them.  
2. I shall show that there is not so much difference betwixt Plot and Plot, betwixt the Criminals then and Conspirators now, as there is an agreement; which I shall do by my making a parallel betwixt the one and the other.  
3. I shall show the ground of that difference which is betwixt them; and how that what hath been said in their way of comparison, to invalidate the discovery made of the present Plot, serves little to the purpose it was produced for.  
There are four things, 
New Plot. Ibid.  which the foresaid Author doth collect from the History of the Powder Treason. 

1. There was then visible the overt act of Barrels of Powder laid in the place.  
2. There was a flight of some of the Conspirators, and their resistance at their taking.  
3. Those that were Executed, did all confess the fact at the time of Execution.  
4. All persons indifferently, both Papists and Protestants, Foreigners and Natives believed the thing, etc.    
And from this he doth proceed to show, that all things in the present Conspiracy run counter to every particular in that. When he begins to discourse upon the first, he saith, This heinous Plot is built upon the bare testimony of the Swearers, and that there is not any matter of Fact visible and apparent, that has any proper tendency, or relation to a Conspiracy for destroying the King, and levying of War. Indeed he cannot deny, but that there are two things, which if they could be proved to be done by them, as well as it is manifest that such things were, would be just matter of accusation; and they are the death of Sir Edmonbury Godfrey, and the Consult: but he can put off these (he thinks) with a wet finger; and if this be done, leaves all the world to challenge them further with any thing of that nature. Let not the death of Sir Edmond be urged, saith he, as matter of Fact, because the unfortunate end of that Gentleman, as to the true manner of it, is a Mystery yet unrevealed, and is laid at the Papists door, just as Antichrist is charged upon the Pope. But is the death of that Gentleman so easily to be put up? Or is it indeed a mystery yet unrevealed? Was it not plainly made out that this Gentleman was murdered, and that he could not both strangle and thrust himself through? And was it not so revealed that Bedlow, that was to have been one of the Assassinate's, and did see his body when dead, did of his own accord confess it? and Prance that had an hand in his death did upon his apprehension also acknowledge it? And was it not so revealed that some fled for it, and others that were taken, after an open Trial according to course at Law, were Executed for it? And shall it be still a Mystery unrevealed?  
But saith he, there are few unbiased and discerning men, that are convinced, that these poor Creatures, that suffered upon that account, were truly guilty. What in the mean while doth he make of the Judges and the Jury, were they neither unbiased nor discerning? or shall they be neither, who do believe them to have been guilty upon the same Evidence which the Court was then satisfied with? But what should hinder unbiased and discerning men from being convinced? was there reason to think the matter of the Evidence not to be sufficient, or the Persons giving it not to be of sufficient Credit? Let us consider the case, and that will best inform us. The persons were such as were either actually engaged, or invited so to be; that either helped to do it, or did see it when done: Both, though not known to one another, concurring, as far as they were concerned, in the same circumstances, as to the Person murdered, the posture of his Body, the place where it was, and the way in which it was to be disposed of, etc. And as they did not vary from one another, so not from themselves, in above one point, that the Adversaries (as I remember) can after all their diligent search find them out in, (if that be true too) and all this fortified by several Collateral and concurring Testimonies. Whilst in the mean time, the Prisoners were manifestly convinced of the contrary; saying and unsaying, affirming and denying the same things: Sometimes Berry did know Prance as he passed up and down the house only; at another time he knew him so, 
Trials of Green, etc. p. 24. p. 49.  as often to drink with him. Sometimes he never had such an order, as he had the 13 th' and 14 th' of October, to suffer no Strangers, nor any Persons of Quality to come into Somerset-House; at another time he had received such orders before. Sometimes Hill knew not Kelly, 
p. 41. & 48, Compared.  at another time he owned that he knew him, (for 'tis Kelly and not Girald that he speaks of more expressly, 
Compendium p. 18.  notwithstanding what an Advocate of their saith.) Sometimes, he left the Lodgings before Sir edmond's death; 
Trials p. 57  at another time it was a week or fortnight after, etc.  
But the above said Author, saith Prance, did once disclaim his Evidence before King and Council: 
New Plot p. p. 14.  This 'tis true he did, but was so little resolute in it, 
Tryal's of Green, &c: p. 26, & 70.  that as soon as he came to Newgate he most earnestly begged of Captain Richardson to go back and assure his Majesty, that all he had that day said at Council was false; 
Prance's Narative. p. 23. etc.  and that he retracted before for fear of his life, having not a pardon; or if he had, knowing that he should never enjoy it, because of the attempts he might expect to be made upon him; or if both, that however he should lose his Trade & Livelihood: These, together with his persuasion that it was lawful to say or swear any thing in his way of Religion, did induce him to it. But however he is not rationally to be believed, 
New Plot.  saith the Author, until he shall in the same circumstance of dying, declare their guilt, in which they so solemnly declared their Innocency. By which way of arguing no man can ever die with a Lie in his mouth; nor is any person or company of men to be believed, in whatever they affirm against such an one, or upon what grounds soever they affirm it, unless they are, or till they come to be in the same circumstances with him, that did thus deny it; which is very absurd to say. 
Prances's Narrative. p. 24, 25.  But to put it so far out of question, we are not without this kind of evidence also; for Prance himself, when his Life was despaired of, continued to affirm the truth of whatever he at first deposed, and as soon as he was recovered, did own it afresh before the King and Council. 
bedlow's Examination in his last sickness. p. 10.  And Bedlow upon his Deathbed did declare upon the Faith of a dying man, and as he hoped for Salvation, that he had wronged no man by his Testimony, and what ever he had testified concerning the Plot, was true. Here is then the affirmation of Persons, not concerned to take away the Life of those men, against their denial, who were concerned to save their own Lives; and the evidence of persons declaring their guilt in the same circumstance of dying, in which the others did so solemnly declare their Innocence.  
And lastly, here is the affirmation of such Persons, who had no Principles of Religion to lead them thus to affirm, against them, whose Principles did encourage them thus to deny. But, saith the above cited Author, Berry at the same time [of his death] declared himself both innocent and a Protestant. 
New Plot. Ibid.  That Persons may declare themselves Protestant's whilst they are Papists, 
V. Abboti Antilog. p. 34. a  is not what we are at this time a day ignorant of; and of which we have store of Instances: And that professed Protestants may deny at their death those crimes which they are justly charged with and condemned for, is what we need not the help of an Author of theirs to show us Precedents in; 
Compendium. p. 75.  for 'tis what we freely confess. But that our Religion should be the worse for it, or that the Protestant Doctrine is guilty of it, as he would have it, needs more than his bare affirmation to gain credit and belief; when we have no such thing as a Dispensation beforehand or Absolution after it, without detestation, &c, to befriend us. Now whether Berry did declare himself a Protestant, and deny the Fact upon their Principles; or whether he did deny the Fact upon no Principles, is one in effect as to the present case: But that he did deny what he knew to be true, besides the Evidence otherwise against him, we have no little reason to think from his silence at his death, 
Smith's account of the 14 Malefactors, etc. p. 18.  when he said not any thing, either in asserting his innocence as to the murder of Sir Edmund, neither as to the Religion he died in; As one that was present, and not a little concerned to observe, doth affirm. It looks very odd that he should profess so much remorse for his dissimulation in his Religion, and so much innocency in the point he was condemned for; and yet at his Execution, should not clear himself, but pass by both as if he had not been concerned. This is so irreconcilable either to his sincerity in the one, or innocency in the other, that it was foreseen; and therefore as a Speech was prepared for Hill, before his death, so another is made for Berry after it. He then declared himself both innocent and a Protestant, saith one: 
New Plot. Ibid.  He absolutely denied at the very Gallows, the Fact: Nay, as the Cart was drawing away, 
Compendium. p. 20.  he lifted up his hands, and said, as I am innocent, so receive my Soul, O Jesus; as another telleth us. And yet he spoke not one word to either. Now what reason have we to believe his silence beyond others protestations at their death? and yet some men's Protestations of that kind are no more to be believed by this Author, (as that of the Lord Castlehaven's, which he mentions) than we believe those of Hill and Green.  
So far then we are not without Reason to convince us, that these persons were some of Sir Edmund's true Murderers. But then if we shall add to this, the strange circumstances of Prance's apprehension, and the description Bedlow gave of such a person before it. If we consider what Sir Edmond himself did foretell about his being the first Martyr; 
Trial of Whitebread, etc. p. 26.  and the notice that Dugdale gave of his death, two days before it was known at London what became of him, and many other circumstances which might easily be collected; We have good marks to find out the Murderers by, and the door, at which his death is to be laid.  
The second thing owned by the abovesaid Author for an overt Act, is the Consult in April 24 (not the 14th as he mistakes) But that he would have to be only a Triennial meeting in course. But than what needed so great secrecy as to time and place, 
The Trial of Ireland p. 53  and such care to be taken not to hasten to London long before the time, nor to appear much about the Town till the meeting be over, lest occasion should be given to suspect the Design, which the Letter doth speak of? Then, how came it to pass, that there were other Consults, and that Mr. Ireland should take such a Journey, 
p. 40  as from Stafford-shire to London, by Post in August, to be present at it; as besides the than proof, 
P. 47.  Mr. Jennison doth affirm, and his own hand hath made evident? or if the Register spoken of, was only about Consults for that purpose, why was not that Book produced, as desired, for their Vindication?  
What other overt Acts there were, 
P. 54.  as Coleman's Letters, Seals for Commissions (upon which Whitebread only answered, the taking them out of his Chamber was more than they had power to do) and the like, I shall not further search after, but leave it to what is, and will be further made public by Authority. But what hath been said already is sufficient to show, how little truth there is in what the abovesaid Author doth fantastically affirm, 
New-Plot. p. 15.  viz. that the charge of the Plot is only supported by the breath of the Witnesses coined into Oaths.  
2. He saith that in the Powder-Treason there was the flight of some of the Conspirators, and the resistance at their taking. 
Ibid.  But not one Person in this pretended Conspiracy did either fly, or abscond (except only the Priests, who were obnoxious to the Law for their Priesthood) nay the greatest part of them, upon the first rumour of their accusation, came in and rendered themselves.  
But I deny, (1) that its an undoubted mark of a person's Innocency, that he did not fly when a Treason was discovered, and he had an opportunity of making his escape. For the case may be, that he may not be charged with it, and then if he flies he brings it upon himself. So Tresham in the Powder-Treason still continued about the Court, 
Compendium. p. 74.  that he might thereby seem wholly free and innocent; as an Author above quoted observes. (2.) He may stay and yet be guilty, upon a presumption that the Charge may not be made good, and he may escape for want of proof, as Garnet hoped. (3.) He may stay and yet be guilty, as presuming, that though the Charge be made good; yet he hath persons of power and interest great enough to interpose betwixt him and danger. And therefore rather than be declared guilty by flight, or betray and discredit his Cause, or distrust his Friends, he may choose to stay, though he be no more innocent than those that fly.  
But after all, is it not possible that not one should be found, whose guilt, or fear did prevail upon him to fly and secure himself, etc. as he saith it is not? He grants the Priests did fly; but it was because they were obnoxious to the Law for their Priesthood. If that was the reason, than there had been no Priest but what would have fled; those that were not charged with this Treason, as well as those that were: for, setting aside this new charge, all as Priests are alike obnoxious; and yet we find all did not alike fly.  
But were there none but Priests that fled, 
Trial of Green, etc. p. 21, 43. etc.  then where are those Laymen that were concerned in the charge of Sir Edmund's murder, and that are so often mentioned in the Trials? What are become of many persons whom it is not for me to name, but are known to have resided beyond Seas, ever since the Examination into this business? Now if what one of themselves saith be true, 
Ibid. p. 67.  that flight is a sign of guilt, than these are self-condemned, that put it upon this issue, and say that the stoutest man, had he been guilty, 
New Plot.  would have fled upon such warning: but the most timorous of Nature did not fly, 
Ibid.  because he was innocent.  
3. He saith, 
New Plot p. 13, 15.  those that were executed for the Powder-Treason, did all confess the Fact at the time of Execution: 
Compendium. p. 75.  Whereas those that have been executed for this Plot have at their Deaths denied the Fact, and resisted all temptations of Pardon, and Reward, etc. That the Traitors in the Powder-Treason did confess the Fact, we readily own; if they mean thereby the Treason, as it was at first hatched: But that they did thus confess, and not persist in the protestation of their Innocency to the Death, was not because their Consciences would not dispense with it, 
Compend. p. 73.  or their Religion not permit them to be obstinate and for swear themselves, (as a late Author of theirs would have us believe) but for other reasons; as I have showed at large before 
* V. Pag. 35, 40, & 46. . For I question, not but that as Faux did lay the blame at first wholly upon himself: so he would have sworn to it also, if it had not been the Torture that he stood more in awe of, than his Conscience. It was upon this score and not his Religion, as the Author of the Compendium doth suppose, that the Lords laughed at his Huffing and Bravadoes, since otherwise they would rather have put him to his Oath, 
Compend. p. 73.  than to the Rack, to have extorted a Confession from him; and therefore to make use of his case amongst others, as the abovesaid Author doth, to oppose to the case of the Persons that were lately executed, and that denied the Fact at their Execution, is nothing to the purpose. Before Their case then will be of use to the vindication of These, now, they must prove that the whole Plot was at that time confessed by the Conspirators, that they never denied any thing which they were upon Oath charged with, and that they had no Principles to warrant them if they did. But the contrary to these is manifest, as hath been already showed, and so can do them little service. 
Vid. pag. 35. etc.  Without doubt had the Traitors than had as much Power to conceal the whole, as they did the greatest part of it, and could as well have kept to themselves what they did confess, as well as what they did not, we had been little the wiser. They then were of the same Religion, & acted upon the same Principles as the others now; and therefore that they then did confess, and these did not, was because their Circumstances were different, and not because They were guilty, and These were innocent. For if the other had been in these men's condition, I do not doubt but they would as obstinately have denied; and if These had been in their condition, I as little doubt but that they would have confessed according as they did then. The others denied, as long as Denial would do them good, and till they saw it could not be denied, having clear proof against them: And these did deny and obstinately persist so to do, for want of other proof than the Oaths of others; and so their denial being opposed to the others affirming, their forswearing it to the other Oaths, their dying words to the others that were to live, they did not question but the World would believe they had Truth on their side. And when the Principles and Honour of their Religion, their own Credit, and safety of their Friends, and the fear of Damnation to boot (which often prevails with Men more than the hopes of a present Reward) do engage them; it's not impossible that they should deny, and die in the denial of what is true.  
4. The abovesaid Author adds, that all persons indifferently, both Papists and Protestants, etc. believed the thing [the Powder-Treason] and no soul living did deny it. Deny it; how could they, since there was Powder, and Match discovered, and Faux was apprehended upon the Place? Deny it how could they, since some of the Traitors were actually killed, or taken in an Insurrection; and those that were taken did confess it more or less? But what the Conspirators would have done themselves, and what others also of the same persuasion would have said, if there had been nothing, but the Oaths of Witnesses against them, we must go to their Principles and Practice to conjecture. But though they could not deny the matter of Fact, yet they have done what they could towards it; For some tell us, 
Compend. p. 74.  as hath been showed, that Cecil (to ruin the Party) drew those fiery men in by his subtle tricks and artifice. Others, 
Advocate of Conscience p. 226.  that this desperate Attempt seemed rather of a private kindred or acquaintance, than of any Religion. Nay they have the Confidence to say, That the true Priests and Catholics of England knew them [the Traitors] not to be Papists &c. and they were never Frequenters of Catholic Sacraments with any Priest, 
Ibid. & A Plea for Engl. Priests printed 1621. p. 55, & 58.  etc. If men will dare to say these things, when their own Writings are against them, and when we read there of the great endearedness 'twixt Catesby's family and the Jesuits, 'twixt Catesby and Garnet, 'twixt Sir Everard and Gerard, etc. they may as well deny the whole, and we may thereby know what they would do if they had not matter of Fact, and overt Acts too visibly and apparently in their way. If they will say things so notoriously and evidently false, 
New-Plot. p. 12.  what may we not expect when a Plot is made out purely by the dint of swearing? (as one doth phrase it): Though in our present case there is more than the Credulity of people to corroborate that Testimony, notwithstanding whatever he is there pleased to say.  
From what hath been said, we may see how little foundation there is for the opposing the Plot of the Powder-Treason to the late one amongst ourselves; and how little the Proceedings and Confessions of the Conspirators in the former, will serve to clear the Innocency of those that suffered in the later.  
But because they have thus opposed the one to the other, I shall on the otherside, before I conclude, consider how they do agree; and that we may observe, 

1. As the Plots were in prosecution, & before discovery.  
2. In the way by which they were discovered.  
3. In the event, and what happened upon and after Discovery.    
In the first of these, I have the way in part traced out by Sir Samuel Baldwyn, one of his Majesty's Sergeants at Law, 
Trials of Ireland, etc. p. 12.  in Mr. Ireland's Trial, who doth there mention two or three Particulars, in which this Plot doth resemble that of the Powder-Treason. And that it doth, in the matter of it, the principal Agents concerned in it, the Principles which they proceeded upon, and the way in which it was managed, etc.  
(1.) There is an agreement in the matter, so saith that worthy person, that horrid Design [of the Powder-Treason] was to take away the life of the then King, to subvert the Government, to introduce the Popish Religion, and to destroy the established Protestant Religion in England; and so we think our proofs will make it out, that in each of these particulars this Design is the same that that was. Thus far he. That it was so in that former Plot is universally acknowledged; and that it was so here is what the Evidence doth concur in. How far it was to introduce the Popish Religion, Mr Colemans' Letter doth show, 
Coleman's 2 d Letter in his Trial. p. 69.  who saith, we have here a mighty work upon our hands, no less than the Conversion of three Kingdoms, and by that means the utter subduing of a pestilent Heresy which has domineered over a great part of this Northern World a long time; there was never such hopes of success since the death of our Queen Mary, as now in our days. And how all this could be done without subverting the Government, or how both the one and the other could be done without taking away the Life of his Majesty, is not easy to be understood.  
(2.) There is an agreement in the principal Agents concerned in it. The great Actors in the Powder Treason, saith Sir Samuel, were Priests and Jesuits, etc. and so are they in this. That chiefly guided and managed by Henry Garnet, Provincial of the Jesuits in England; and the great Actor in this design is Mr. Whitebread, Provincial of the same Order.  
(3.) There is an agreement in the Principles which they proceeded upon. As first in General, that any thing is lawful which may serve the Cause, and in particular that an Heretic Prince may be deposed and killed; That an Heretic People may be destroyed; and that a Foreign Force, to serve those ends, may be invited over, and introduced. That these were the Principles which they in the Powder-Treason went upon, is evident from the History itself, and what hath been said before 
* p. 25, 46, 48, 56, etc. : and they were the same considerations which gave birth and encouragement to the present Design, 
Stayley's Trial p. 5.  as we may see throughout the Trials. This was the ground of Staley's displeasure against the King, that he was an Heretic; 
Fitz gerald's Nar. p. 7.  this was the ground of the other practices against him not only here, but also in Ireland. And the subduing the pestilent Heresy which domineered here, was the great reason of Mr. Colemans' correspondence with the French King's Confessor, and of soliciting Aid and Assistance from thence.  
(4.) There is an agreement in the management of both ' (1.) In point of secrecy, obliging one another by Oaths and the Sacrament. I have showed that so it was in the Powder-Treason. 
* 
Vid. p. 31. Ireland's Trial, pag. 10-28.  
Dugdale's further Informat. p. 16   And that it was so here, all the Witnesses do maintain. (2.) In the secret Preparations that were made. So it was in the other, as I have showed 
* Vid. p. 31. Ireland's Trial, pag. 10-28. Dugdale's further Informat. p. 16  And the like information we have here of Moneys, 
(a) Colemans Trial. p. 26.  Forces, and 
(b) Fitz-Geralds Nar. p. 4, etc.  Commissions, etc.  
(5.) They agree in the State they were in, and the little provocation that was given them to begin and form such a Design. So it was in the Powder-Treason, when they had not so much as a pretended cause of grief, as K. James in his Speech said, but were obliged by him, as I have showed 
† Trials of Whitebread, etc. p. 10, 11. . And so it had been here: For whereas by the Statute of 25 Eliz. the Priests might be tried as such, and aught to die for it, yet they at this time have been so mercifully dealt with, as they have been suffered to live amongst us under the danger of the Statute, as Sir Creswel Levins observed: and the Laity hath been little disturbed by the enforcements of the Laws made against them. 
Address, Novemb. 29. Fitz gerald's Narrative. p. 30.  Thus it was in England; As the Parliament in their late Address to his Majesty, hath abundantly showed; and how it was in Ireland, a Gentleman of that Nation gives us an Account.  
(6.) There is an agreement in the Prophecies (as they would have them accounted) of the great Change that would happen in a short time. So it was before the Powder Treason, as I have showed 
* p. 16, & 25. . And so it was now; what Cardinal Barbarin should say of this nature, hath been deposed before the Lord's, 
Smith's Narrative p. 27.  and Reports of the same kind have been very common at home and abroad, as hundreds can testify.  
2. As there was an agreement in the state of things before it was discovered; so there is no little resemblance in the way by which they were discovered. For, was there a Letter writ? so were here Papers found of Coleman's, and Harcourt's. Did there some confess then? so some did here. Did some of them fly and abscond for it then? so they have done here also; as I have showed before.  
3. There is great resemblance in the Event, and what happened and was done upon and after the discovery. As,  
(1.) More was left undiscovered than was discovered. What kind of help the design of the Powder-Treason required in itself, and what Intelligence the State had then of Forces, Arms, Horses and Moneys, I have before showed 
* p. 20, etc. . And yet little of any of these was found out; insomuch as an Apologist of theirs doth venture to plead, as to one Branch, 
Eudaemon Apol. p. 278.  Where was that great sum of Money, talked of, found? or, how much of it was confiscated and brought into the King's Exchequer? And so it happened now; for though the Design could not be carried on without, and Information accordingly hath been given of Provisions made in that kind; yet what from the pretences those Forces and Moneys were raised under (as we have the Account 
* Fitz. Gerald's informat. p. 11. Smith's Narrat. p. 30. Compend. p. 85. ) what from the distribution of Arms into several hands, without keeping Stores and Magazines; what from the timely notice they had to dispose of them; not so much hath been discovered, but that also an Advocate of theirs, doth plead after the like manner as before, There has not been found any ill Letter, any Commission, any Bill of Exchange, any Money, any Arms, any Horses, or any thing else suspicious. With how much tr●●● this is said in all respects, Coleman's Letters, and Arm in some quantities taken, and other particulars, do prove. But yet it must be acknowledged that though much is proved against them, yet more is still undiscovered than discovered.  
(2.) There is a great resemblance in the ways taken to fling off what hath been discovered, and to conceal what hath not. As,  
1. By charging it upon others. Thus we find them practising in the business of the Powder-Treason. If it had succeeded, the whole was to have been laid to the charge of the Puritans; and when it did not succeed, they tell us it was the trick of a Minister of State, and that the Conspirators were not Papists, as hath been before declared. And that same method hath been observed now. For if the present Design had taken, and the King had been killed; 
Bedlow's last Examinat. p. 5.  they had settled some, whom they should pitch the Action upon, and intended to lay it upon the Presbyterians, as hath been deposed. But since it's now broke forth, 
Dugdale's Informat. p. 5.  and hath not hitherto succeeded, they have taken care to charge as much of it as they can otherwhere. First, There is a sham-Plot started, and a Design laid to make the Presbyterians, 
Dangerfield's Nar.  or whomsoever they pleased so to call, to be the only Conspirators. And because the death of Sir Edmundbury, if found upon them, would lend us a great light toward the revealing the Plot, 
Dugdale's Informat. p. 8.  and be no little inducement to mankind to believe it, they had thoughts of charging it upon debauched persons, of whom he was a prosecutor. When that was not likely to take, they did endeavour to make the Earl of Danby the Contriver of it. 
Reflections on the E. of Danby.  And because that was soon disproved, then, it's said, that his own Party did murder him, and laid it upon the Papists to make them odious.  
2. There is the like method taken to avoid the Charge, by calumniating of Authority. So they did in the Powder-Treason: Then the Judges were Liars; the Privy-Councellors cruel, for ordering Garnet, and Hall, etc. to be tortured; (as they published, but published falsely to the World, as hath been showed before 
* Hist. p. 26. Vindicat. p. 13. & 36. Eudaem. parallel Torti, etc. p. 261. Compendium. p. 16. & 67. .) And the public Writings, and what was justified to be true by Authority, were said to be forged. In like manner have they now proceeded, for they tell us that those that suffered by the Sentence of the Court were innocent in the judgement of unbiased and discerning men. That Prance was threatened by the Lords that went to examine him, and was tortured to make him accuse others.  
3. To avoid or weaken the Charge, 
Malice defeated. p. 3.  false reports are raised upon those that amongst themselves do confess. So in the Powder-Treason we are told that Bats and Littleton recanted, and that what ever Bates accused the rest of was through the hopes of life, as hath been showed before. 
* P. 63, & 65  So they have proceeded at this time mnch after the like manner. Not to repeat all the stories that they have made, or made use of to impair the Credit of the Witnesses; nor to undertake to distinguish betwixt what's true and what's false in this matter, I shall only instance in that which is made public to the World. Of this kind was the Design which was laid to charge Oats with Sodomy, 
V. The printed Narat.  and him and Bedlow with a Conspiracy against the Lord Treasurer. And, which is somewhat a kin to this, the tampering with Bedlow, to recall what he had said, or to make him easy in what he should say against the great Conspirators; 
Mr. read's Trial.  that so they might either make him theirs, or render him less able to hurt them, when they could accuse him of listening to such Proposals.  
4. They did endeavour to disguise and conceal it, by being obstinate when apprehended. This hath been before discoursed of with respect to the Gunpowder-Treason 
* P. 34, etc. p. 63, & 84.  when they denied whatever could be denied, and equivocated in what was not to be denied, even to the death. And thus it was in this present Plot. Without doubt had Coleman's Letters not been taken, all the Correspondence that was maintained in that way betwixt him and the French King's Confessor, would as obstinately be denied, as it was by him, that any such was continued after 1675, which was the year the last of those Letters was dated in. Or had not the Letter been found amongst Harcourt's Papers, which mentions the Consult April 24th, they would sooner have denied the thing, than have racked their Wit to have put it upon the score of a Triennial meeting. Things that were not to be denied, 'tis no wonder if they do confess; but things that depend upon yea and no, 'tis no wonder that they do deny. This Hall and Garnet did practise, and the same liberty that they took, 'tis likely the persons of late amongst us also did use, when they have the same Principles, to allow it.  
From what hath been said we see, that the Powder-Treason and this present Plot do agree in far more Circumstances than they differ, and those that they differ in are not so great but they are capable of an easy accommodation. And this leads me to the  
3. General. To show the ground of that difference which is betwixt Plot and Plot, Criminals and Criminals. And the great instance is, the Confession of the one, and Denial of the other. 
New Plot p. 16.  This an Author of theirs doth triumph in; I challenge, saith he, all mankind to assign a Cause of this difference with the least colour of Reason and Humanity. But, as I have before said 
* p. 85. , He must first prove that the Conspirators than did confess ingenuously, candidly and freely. For if they confessed what they could not deny; if they again would have denied what they had confessed; if, further, they did often equivocate when they did pretend to confess; if, lastly, they did deny and conceal more of what they knew, than they did confess and discover, as I have made it evident they did 
* p. 37, etc. : Then Garnets' Confession is equal to Whitebread's Denial; and Whitebread's Denial differs not materially from Garnet's Confession. Both these may be, 
New Plot. Ibid.  and yet there be no new Creed, nor new Faith since those days amongst them; as the aforesaid Author would infer there must, upon this different event, if we allow not both to be innocent. Denying and confessing are indeed in themselves incompatible, and had it been true which the abovecited Authors do say, that all of the Conspirators in the Powder-Treason did acknowledge their Treasons, and asked God and the King pardon (which I have showed to be otherwise 
* p. 46. ) and impartially confessed all that they knew of that matter; then their Confession might be well opposed to these men's Denial: but when the Confession was so restrained and qualified (as I have above showed) it's a plain sign, that had there been nothing but Conscience and Principles in their way (as these pretend) they would have taken another course; and the Scaevola Faux, that had the Courage to say, and without doubt to do what he said, that if he had happened to be within the House, 
Proceed. p. 37.  as he was without, when they took him, he would not have failed to have blown up Himself, Them, House and all: and he that also laid all the blame upon himself, and would own no Complices, would have died with the same Roman resolution, had not the Rack brought him to better manners 
* As I before observed p. 84. . This Sir Everard Digby did believe of him, I knew, saith he, that he [Faux] had been employed in great matters, 
Paper 9  and till Torture, sure he carried it very well. There is a time that it is either not possible, or to no purpose to deny, and then there can be no trial of a Man's Principles. Thus it was with Watson and Clark in King James' time, who knew that they were betrayed by the Jesuits, and so were thereby disabled to prevent the danger and scandal likely to befall their Party by their Confession, had they been willing to swear they were innocent, and to take it upon their death. There was not an opportunity for them to make that Experiment upon themselves, nor to give us an Evidence how far their Consciences would have dispensed with so doing. And so it was no fit case for the above said Author to oppose to this at present for that reason as well as another, viz. that they were not Jesuits, nor of their Party. They must make the circumstances the same, and show that what was then confessed, was sincere & free, full and particular; that they never did deny when asked upon Oath, nor equivocate in what they did confess, nor ever unsay what they had said; 
Compend. P. 73.  before we can believe they did confess merely because their Consciences could not dispense with so horrid a thing (as that Author calls it) as swearing they were innocent, and taking it upon their death. But if they cannot prove this, and the case is apparently otherwise, as I have before showed; then for all this discourse and bustle of theirs, in comparing the Powder-Treason with this Plot, and the Passages and Comportments of the Criminals upon that occasion, with these of our modern pretended (as they say) Conspirators, we are still where we were, and have good reason to believe that both Those then, and These now did act by like Principles and Measures; and that they did confess or deny with the like sincerity that our Author gave a Book that he writ in defence of the Papists and Popish Traitors, the Title of the new Plot of the Papists, to transform Traitors into Martyrs; and called that a New Plot, which we in England know to be as ancient as the days of Thomas a Becket.   
FINIS.   

CONTENTS of the Vindication.  
Sect. 1. p. 2. 
THe Conspiracy of the Powder Treason was not the Contrivance of a Minister of State. An Account of the Letter wrote to the Lord Monteagle, that it was not written by a Decoy, and that Tresham was no such. A Character of the Apologists that wrote upon this subject. The Correspondence that is maintained betwixt the Jesuits. Their Calumnies. An account of the Breves of Clement the 8th; and of the Lord Balmerinoch's Letter.  Sect. 2. p. 20. 
That more were concerned in the Powder-Treason than were publicly known. The Design itself considered. The Character of the persons chiefly concerned in it. The Provisions made for it. The Prayers which were then used. An account of the Evidence then given. The Confession of the Traitors imperfect. That what they confessed was not from Conscience. Their Obstinacy, especially in concealing the Priests.  Sect. 3. p. 53. 
Those that fled and suffered for the Powder Treason were really guilty. What Jesuits were in it. The Trial of Garnet. That something related in Confession may and aught to be discovered. Garnet had the knowledge of the Plot out of Confession. That He and the other Jesuits did satisfy the Consciences of the Scrupulous.  Sect. 4. p. 67. 
That the Powder-Treason was undertaken upon the account of Religion. That King James gave them no assurance of Favour.  Sect. 5. p. 71. 
That the Church of Rome never gave any real and good satisfaction of the abhorrency of that Treason. The Commendations which they give of the Traitors. The Saintship which they give to Garnet and Hall. The favour which those that fled for it found at Rome.  Sect. 6. p. 76. 
The Powder-Treason and the present Popish Plot compared. That they agree in more things than they differ; and what they differ in, are not so material as what they do agree in.