AN ANTIDOTE AGAINST POISON.  
Composed of some Remarks upon the Paper printed by the direction of the Lady Russel, and mentioned to have been delivered by the Lord Russel to the Sheriffs at the place of his Execution.  
THe Publishing of this Paper as the last Speech of a dying man, cannot but surprise all Persons who were present at the Trial of the Lord Russel, to read such Reflections upon the Judges, the King's Council, the Sheriffs, and the Jury; the Fact so untruly represented, and the Offenders Innocence so strongly asserted, when they can all attest to the fairness of his Trial, the respectful Treating of him by the King's Council, as far as was consistent with their Duty, without any strains upon the Evidence, to the favourable Demeanour of the Court towards him, not in the least aggravating the Crime beyond the Evidence, and to the fullness of the Evidence upon the Proofs produced: And therefore those who heard the Evidence, must acknowledge, that tlat Paper is so far from containing the whole truth of the Lord Russel's Case, that what of Fact is therein infected, is wholly disguised, and untruly and unfaithfully set down. Neither doth the Lord Russel, in his Speech to the Sheriffs, aver all contained in that Paper to be true, nor the Paper to contain the whole truth of his Case, only saith, he had set down in that Paper, all that he thought fit to leave behind him. No doubt he might have as well said, All that his faithful Confessor advised him to leave behind him.  
For whosoever strictly peruseth the Paper, will not find the Ingenuity, Sincerity, or plain style of a Dying Gentleman, but may discover the peculiar Dialect of an Artist, accustomed to shadow Truth with doubtful and ambiguous Expressions; and the Paper artificially contrived and designed, to gratify a Party, by a colourable asserting the Innocency of the Criminal, condemned by the Law for High Treason, and laying a Malicious Imputation upon the Government, for an unjust Prosecution of an Innocent Person to Death.  
Whether the Paper doth truly state the Crime, upon the Fact proved, for which the Lord Russel was Condemned?  
And whether it contain any plain denial of that Fact? will best appear by truly stating the Crime charged upon him by the Indictment, and the Fact proved upon him at his Trial  
The Lord Russel with others are charged by the Indictment with High Treason for Conspiring, Compassing and Imagining the Death and Destruction of the King, and raising of a Rebellion within the Kingdom.  
And the Overt Acts wherewith they are charged, are their Meeting together, consulting and agreeing to raise an Insurrection and Rebellion, and to seize upon the King's Guards.  
At the Trial of Colonel Rumsey did swear that there was a General Rising intended in October and November last, and that he was engaged therein. And that the Earl of Shaftsbury, who was likewise engaged therein, in November last acquainted him, that the Duke of Monmouth, the Lord Grace, Lord Russel, Sir Thomas Armstrong, and Mr. Ferguson were to meet at Mr. Shepherd's house in Abchurch Lane, and sent him thither with a Message to them; that accordingly he went thither, and found the Lord Russel and the rest there, and delivered to them the Message from the Earl of Shaftsbury; which was, that it was high time to come to some Resolution about the Rising: That answer was returned, that Mr. Trenchard had assured them that in four hours' time one Thousand Foot, and two or three Hundred Horse should be ready at Taunton. But now Master Trenchard required two or three days notice of the Rising, and therefore they could not go on at present; and that my Lord Shaftsbury must be contented.  
He said the Answer was pronounced by Mr. Ferguson, and the Lord Grace spoke to the same purpose. And being interrogated whether the Lord Russel were so near as to hear the Message, he said he was so near, and could not but hear it. And being asked by the Lord Russel, whether he consented to the Answer, he declared upon his Oath, that the Lord Russel did consent. And that they then treated and consulted of the General Rising. And both Colonel Rumsey and Mr. Shepherd did swear, That the Lord Russel and the rest did consult at Mr. Shepherds about seizing of the King's Guards. And having at a former Meeting appointed some of their Number, viz the Duke of Monmouth, Lord Grace, and Sir Thomas Armstrong, to view in what posture the Guards were, they made Report to the rest there, they found them very remiss in their Duties, and might be easily seized. Mr. Shepherd swore that their meeting at his house was not casual but appointed by themselves, and that they came late in the Evening, and that my Lord Russel mentioned not any private Business to him; neither had he then any private Business with the Lord Russel. But the Lord Russel pretending he came to taste some Sherry which he had bespoke of Mr. Shepherd, Mr. Shepherd denied upon his Oath, that the Lord Russel had bespoke an Sherry of him, or mentioned any such thing then to him.  
The Lord Howard gave in Evidence upon his Oath, that there was a design of a General Rising, both in October and November last: and that the Earl of Shaftsbury then acquainted him, he had Ten thousand brisk Boys ready. And after the Departure of the Earl of Shaftsbury, it was thought necessary, for the preventing of Confusion, and more orderly managing of the Rising, that a select Council should be held for that purpose: And accordingly the Duke of Monmouth, the Earl of Essex, the Lord Russel, Colonel Sidney, Mr. Hamden junlor, and himself, met in January last at Mr. Hamaens House in Russel street, and debated certain Preliminaries to the Rising. Amongst others, Whether the Rising should be in London first, or in the Country first, or in both at once: and the major opinion inclined to have the Rising both in London and the Country at one time. That soon after they held a second Meeting at the Lord russel's house; where all the last mentioned Persons were present, and where they again debated of the Rising, and then came to this Resolution, That some Person should be sent into Scotland to invite some Persons thence, from the discontented Scots to treat with them, That they might be assured of what Assistance they might expect from the Scots. That that matter was committed by them to the special care and conduct of Colonel Sidney. And that Colonel Sidney acquainted him he had sent Aaron Smith into Scotland accordingly; and that he had given him threescore Guineas to defray the charges of his Journey.  
The Lord Howard interrogated by the Lord Russel, whether he said any thing in those Debates, declared upon his Oath that though his Lordship never used to speak much, yet he did speak in those debates, and consented to what was done.  
This was the substance of the Evidence, though delivered by the Witnesses more at large, as will appear by their Depositions when they are printed with the Trial. A clearer Evidence to prove the Facts charged of Meeting and Consulting to raise a Rebellion within the Kingdom, and to seize the King's Guards, I believe the most experienced person in the Laws can never show was ever produced at the Trial of any Traitor. To the greatest and strongest part of the Evidence, which is that of the Lord Howard, and so much of Colonel Rumseys which relates to the General Rising, of which the Witnesses make full proof, the Paper gives no answer at all. With what confidence then can the Author of that Paper introduce a dying man, asserting his own Innocency, & charging the Jury with forwardness and injustice, when the Criminal cannot deny the Facts upon which the Jury gave their verdict. But these Facts, whether true or false, the Criminal would not examine. And if he could not, or would not assert them to be false, no man of any common Ingenuity can doubt them to be true, when sworn by credible Witnesses, and found by a substantial Jury. Yet to satisfy the Conscience of a dying Man, and to cover the Scandal of so great a Crime from vulgar or partial Eyes, these Consultations and Conspiracies to raise a Rebellion, and foment a General Rising, are represented to the People only as some Discourses about some Stirs. They may be in Scotland some Stirs, but in England they are and ever were styled Rebellion.  
As to the other Branch of the Overt Acts of Consulting to seize the Guards, which the Paper makes the only Crime for which the Lord Russel was condemned; this account is given by the Paper, That the Lord Russel was at Mr. Shepherd's house with that Company but once, and there was no Undertaking then of securing and seizing the Guards, nor none appointed to view or examine them some discourse there was of the feasiblenesse of it, and several times by accident in general discourse elsewhere  
This account which the Lord Russel gives of this matter, is rather a Confirmation of the Testimonies of Colonel Rumsey and Mr. Shepherd than an avoidance thereof. He admits the feasibleness thereof was then discoursed of, and at other times likewise. They swore that the Persons appointed to view the Guards, reported than they found them to be very remiss in their Duties, and might be easily seized. The Lord Russel remembers he was at Mr. Shepherd's house but once, Shepherd swore he was there with that Company twice, and at the last time the Report was made after viewing of the Guards.  
The seizing of the Guards was not the only nor Principal Fact upon which the Lord Russel was condemned, as appears by the Proof stated; but it was one of the Instances to make out against him the general design of raising a Rebellion, as one of the properest ways to secure the General Rising, and was sufficiently proved by two Witnesses to have been consulted upon to that purpose.  
Indeed to what other purpose can any man imagine the L. Russel & his Accomplices, who appeared to have been engaged in a design of a general Insurrection, upon such proof as the Criminal could not deny the Fact, should so often discourse of the feasiblenesse of securing the Guards, as is confessed by the Lord Russel, than in order to facilitate and secure their design of the General Rising? And the Discourse the Paper owns to have been at the Lord Shaftsburies' touching the same matter, who throughout appears to be a principal Agent in the Design of the General Rising, proves the seizing of the Guards to be part of that Design. And though the Lord Russel then expressed a tenderness of shedding cold blood, as a thing detestable, and so like a Popish practice; yet that Deluge of Blood which must necessarily have ensued in the heats of a General Rising, which is evident he pursued to his last, did not at all affect him, because this might become any Heroic Christian drawn in Armour by the Pencil of the Author of Julian: and is not unlike to the practices of the ancient Christians, so shamefully disguised by the same Author.  
If then the Facts whereof the Lord Russel was found guilty by the Jury upon such pregnant proof be so evident, how is it possible for a dying man before God and men to assert his Innocency with such assurance, and so frequently repeated in his Speech to the Sheriff, though short, yet twice repeated; 1. God knows how far I was always from designs against the King's Person, or of altering the Government. 2. I profess I know of no Plot, either against the King's Life, or the Government.  
In the Paper delivered, it is thus expressed; Whatever apprehensions I had of Popery, and of my own severe and heavy share I was like to have under it, when it should prevail, I never had a thought of doing any thing against it, basely or inhumanely, but what could consist with the Christian Religion, and the Laws and Liberties of this Kingdom. Again, I have always loved my Country much more than my Life, and never had any design of changing the Government, and would have suffered any extremity, rather than have consented to any Design to take away the King's Life. In another place he thanks God his part was sincere and well meant, and affirms his Crime to be but Misprision of Treason at most; and Infers, so I die innocent of the Crime I stand condemned for; also he saith, I know I was guilty of no Treason. In the last place he concludes, As I never had any design against the King's Life or the Life of any man whatsoever, so I never was in any Contrivance of altering the Government.  
Half an eye may see their strokes are all drawn by the same hand with all Imaginable Skill, to quiet the Conscience of a dying Criminal, and at the same time by casting a mist before the eyes of the unthinking Multitude, to possess them with the Innocence of the condemned Person and the cruelty of the Government towards him. Let it be considered with what careful Restrictions and Limitations his Innocency is ushered in: That he knew of no Plot or design against the Person of the King, or to Kill the King, or to alter or change the Government; That he never had a thought of doing any thing basely or inhumanly, but what could consist with the Christian Religion, and the Laws and Liberties of this Kingdom; That his Crime was but Misprision of Treason at most, and so he is innocent of the Crime he stands Condemned for. What need of all these cautions, restrictions and evasive circumlocutions to a plain man at the hour of his Death to express his Innocency by? If it had been real, a few plain words would have done it better. viz. That he was not engaged in nor knew of any design of making an Insurrection or Rebellion within the Kingdom. He heard the proof made and knew that was the Crime laid to his charge, which is High Treason both at Common Law and within the first branch of 25. Ed. 3. But that was too clear a matter for a dying Man plainly to deny; his Conscience must have controlled him.  
And to let every Man understand the Subtlety of that paper in declaration of the Lord Russel's innocence with such restrictions: It is necessary to be known that there were two parts in this horrid Design, one was a general R●sing managed by a select Council, wherein the Conspirators according to their different Principles had their different ends, some were for a Common Wealth, though the fewer in number; others were for continuing the Monarchy and Government, but with Exclusion of his Royal Highness. Of this latter sort were the Duke of Monmouth, and the Lord Russel, who plainly sets down in the Paper the Duke of Monmouth's Opinion of him, that they were both of a temper. And the Lord Russel gives his Opinion of himself, That his earnestness in the matter of the Bill of Exclusion, had no small influence in his present Sufferings, though spoken by him with great Reflection upon the Government, yet it truly seems to have been the natural cause of those Extravagancies he was led unto; his zeal in that matter transporting him to seek that by force, which the King had before denied in a course of Parliament.  
The other part of the Plot was downright Assassinating of the King and the Duke of York; this was managed by a Council of Ruffians, who according to their Principles judged this the most expeditious and safest way to secure the General Rising, and render it more effectual. This was made out beyond all peradventure by many Witnesses at the Trials of Captain Walcot and Hone, the latter whereof, besides the proofs against him, confessed himself to be one of the Number who had engaged themselves to kill the King. For this latter horrid Fact of Killing and Assassinating, the Lord Russel was not accused thereof, nor any proof offered to make it out,  
And therefore his frequent professions of his innocency as to any Plot or Design upon the King's Life, or to Kil the King, or his knowing any thing thereof, and of his abhorrence thereof, as an inhuman, base, vile, and barbarous Act, which Epithits the Paper gives to that soul Fact, are no plain declarations of his innocence, as to the Crime charged and proved upon him, of Conspiring, and Consulting to raise an Insurrection within the Kingdom.  
And 't's evident by the Lord Russel's restraining the expression of his Innocency to the design upon the King's Life, and to Killing of the King, and omitting to mention the general Rising, which was fully proved upon him; that the Lord Russel intended only that Crime for which Hone, and Walcot were condemned of Assassinating the King.  
The other restriction of his Innocency, as to any design for Alteration, or Change of the Government, which he esteemed the best in the World; which amounts to no more than that he had no design himself, nor knew of any to throw off Monarchy, and to introduce a Commonwealth; which was never charged upon him, and may easily be presumed to be such a Government, as was no ways agreeable to his height of Spirit.  
But this is no denial of his being engaged in any design to make an Insurrection, though his end in such Insurrection were far short of Killing of the King, or Changing the Monarchy.  
Let it be supposed to be only to overawe the King, that a Parliament might fit to pass the Bill of Exclusion, and other Bills, for the security of the Protestant Religion, or other specious pretences whatsoever; which is the best Construction can be put upon the Lord Russel's Case.  
That he had a part in the Insurrection, is evidently proved, and not denied by him: But he saith his part was sincere, and well-meant. What that sincere meaning was, he doth not plainly tell us; which becomes a Dying Man to do: But leaves us to conjecture from the other parts of the same Paper, what his sincere purposes were. His zeal for the Bill of Exclusion, and Detestation of Popery, which accompanied him to his Death, argue, his sincere intention in the Rising, to be something that was for the promoting of the Bill of Exclusion, and the utter Extirpation of Popery. Yet he professeth, that notwithstanding all his zeal against Popery, that he never had a thought of doing any thing against it Basely, or Inhumanly, but what would well consist with the Christian Religion, and the Laws and Liberties of this Kingdom.  
This again renders the matter difficult, to guests at his sincere meaning in the Design. But the Compiler of the Speech, hath so ordered the Composition of the Sentences by the discretive Particle, But, that room is left for the Dying Person, to intent nothing to be inconsistent with the Christian Religion, and the Laws and Liberties of this Kingdom, but what was base and inhuman, as the Assassination of the King and Duke is judged to be; and that an Insurrection only to compel the King to pass such Bills, as His Protestant Subjects conceived necessary for the Preservation of their Religion, was no base and inhuman thing, and therefore not inconsistent with the Christian Religion, but for the support of it; nor with the Laws and Liberties of the Kingdom, which allow in the opinion of too many, both more ancient and modern Fomenters of Rebellion against Princes, a Liberty in the People to acquire that which they apprehend to be their Right, and for their Preservation, by force, which they cannot obtain from their Princes by fair means, upon the account of a Supreme Law for preservation of themselves, and their Religion, inherent to all Governments.  
To this purpose was prepared and published that venomous Book of Julian, so much hugged and applauded by the Conspirators, as a fit Plaster composed of Ancient Christian Practices, for such Consciences who might entertain the least scruple against Infamous Lybelling of their Prince, or using any Force or Coersion upon the Government. To the same purpose have been Printed, and reprinted of late, divers Seditious Books and Pamphlets; and another was preparing for the Press, by one of the Conspirators: To assert a Supremacy in the People to determine for themselves, against their Prince.  
The Northern Climate hath of late furnished us both with Doctrines and Examples of the same Batch. The Compiler of the Speech, was without question acquainted, if not infected with those Doctrines, Tenets, and Examples, and therefore may be presumed to lie under that great Delusion, that it was lawful for Subjects to procure from their Princes by force, whatever they judged necessary for the preservation of their Civil, or Religious Rights; so in the doing thereof, their parts were sincere and well meant.  
When nothing is clearer by the Laws of this Kingdom, than that to raise a Rebellion, or make an Insurrection, be the design or intent thereof never so speciously good, is High Treason: And it is apparent, that the Lord Russel, or the Author of that Paper, was misguided in two principal and plain Points of Law.  
First, That Meeting and Consulting to make an Insurrection, and in order thereunto to Seize upon the King's Guards, which the Paper calls Stirs, is not Treason within the Statute of Edward 3.  
Secondly, That the Lord Russel's being present at the several Consults for managing the Insurrection, and his part therein amounted only to Misprision of Treason, and so concludes himself innocent of the Crime he stood Condemned for, which was High Treason, for compassing the Death and Destruction of the King, by Conspiring to raise a Rebellion within the Kingdom.  
These mistakes of the plainest points in Law, are the only supports of the Lord Russel's Innocency, whereby he comforted himself at his Death, and may misled others into the same Ruin.  
To prevent which, it is conceived seasonable upon this occasion, to state clearly what the Law of the Land is upon these Points, to the common understanding of every Subject.  
As to the first Point, The Meeting and Consulting to make an Insurrection against the King, or raise a Rebellion within the Kingdom, be the end thereof never so specious for Public Good, though the Rebellion be not actually raised, is High Treason by the Laws of this Land. It was so at Common Law, by the consent of all the Books of Law that Treat of that Matter, and no one Authority against it. It is so since the Statute 25. Edw. 3. Cap. 2. within the first Branch of that Law against Compassing and Imagining the Death of the King. The Death of the King in the Law, is not restrained to the Killing of His Natural Person, but extends as well to Civil Death as Natural. To Conspire to Depose the King, is equally High Treason with that of Killing the King: So for Imprisoning of the King, or seizing, or taking of him into the power of his Subjects, or for laying any Force or Restraint upon him, until he do what his Subjects would have him. These are all High Treason, for compassing his Death, either Natural or Civil; and all Overtacts, which declare the intent of effecting any of these Crimes, as all Meetings, Consultations, and Argeements to rise in Rebellion, and to seize upon the King's Guards, which are his defence against Force, and invite the aid and assistance of the King's Subjects of any other of his Kingdoms, plainly are Overtacts, of compassing the King's Death; and so have been adjudged in all Times, when ever such Case came into Judgement.  
In the 2. 3. Phil. and Mar. one Constable dispersed divers Bills in the Night about the Streets, in which was written, That King Edward the 6 was alive and in France; and at another time, in Coleman street, pointed to a young Man, and said, He was King Edward 6.  
These things tending only to Depose the Queen, were adjudged High Treason, for compassing her Death; and Constable was thereupon Indicted, Attainted, and Executed. The Case is cited in calvin's Case, Co. 7. Rep. Fol. 106. 13. Eliz. Dyer, 298. Doctor Story practised with the Government of Flanders, to Invade the Realm with Force, and declared by what means, and in what manner and place the Invasion might be; No Invasion following, it was referred to all the Judges, to consider what Crime it was, who resolved it to be High Treason; Because an Invasion with Power, could not be, but of necessity it must tend to the Destruction, or great Peril of the Queen.  
1. Jac. The Lord Cobham Conspired with Sir Walter Raleigh, and other the King's Subjects, to make an Insurrection within the Realm, in order to set up the Lady Arabella Steward to be Queen: And to this purpose, Treated with the Ambassador of the Archduke of Austria, for procuring Money from the King of Spain, and persuaded the Lady Arabella to writ Letters to the King of Spain, for his assistance with Forces, and Letters sent accordingly, though the Insurrection did nor follow, but a Discovery made before it was put in Execution. The Lord Cobham, and others of the Conspirators, were Indicted of High Treason, for Compassing the King's Death, and the several Meetings and Consultations for making the Insurrection, and procuring the Invasion laid in the Indictment. The Lord Cobham was Tried by his Peers, Attainted, and Executed. The Lord Hale, in his Pleas of the Crown 13. takes notice only of the Overt-Act of writing the Letters to a Foreign Prince, inciting an Invasion, which he allows to be a sufficient Overt-Act of that Treason which was laid in the Indictment, for Compassing the Death of the King.  
In the same Year of 1. Jac. the Lord Grace, and other Conspirators, met and consulted to make an Insurrection, whereby they designed to seize the King into their power, until he should grant them a Pardon for all Treasons, a Toleration of the exercise of the Popish Religion, and the removal of Twelve of the Privy Council, and should make the Lord Grace Master of his Horse; and several others of the Conspirators, Lord Treasurer, Lord Privy Seal, and other great Officers.  
They were Indicted for Compassing the King's Death, and raising a Rebellion within the Kingdom, and no other Overtacts laid in the Indictment, but several Meetings, Consultations, and Agreements between the Confederates, to raise a Rebellion for the purposes foresaid.  
The Lord Grace was tried by his Peers, and had Judgement to be Drawn, Hanged and Quartered.  
In Sir Henry Vanes Case, Meeting and consulting about Treason, were held sufficient Overt Acts.  
In Plunkets Case lately in the King's Bench; the Indictment was for High Treason, in compassing the death of the King; the Overt Acts alleged against him were Consulting to raise an Insurrection in Ireland, and bringing of the French into Ireland, and Collecting money in Ireland, and holding Correspondencies in France for that purpose. There was no proof of any design upon the King's natural Person, which was in England; yet he was attainted, and executed for High Treason, though no Insurrection or Invasion followed; so that there can be no Question at this time of day, but that Meeting and Consulting to raise a Rebellion; though it be not an actual levying of War within another Branch of the Statute of 25. Edw. 3. yet they are Overtacts of Compassing the King's Death, within the first branch of that Statute.  
The other gross Mistake is, that the Lord russel's Crime was only Misprision of High-Treason.  
Misprision of High Treason is the Concealment thereof by a person who had a bare knowledge of the Treason, without any mixture of his consent. But if the person be present at the Debates and Consultations, though he say nothing, if he do not immediately reveal, but continues to meet and be present at their Debates, he is a principal Traitor. Where a Person was not present at the Debates and Resolves, but is afterwards acquainted with them, and give his Consent thereto, it is High Treason, and not a Misprision barely.  
This was the Case of George Brooke, to whom the Lord Cobham related the whole Conspiracy of setting up the Lady Arabella, who consented to the same, and was Indicted and Attainted as a principal Traitor in that Conspiracy. Now the Lord Russel, as he puts his own Case of being present at several Meetings, where seizing of the Guards were treated of, and horrid things spoken, argues himself guilty of High Treason, though he make a false Conclusion from those Premises that 'twas but Misprision. But the Witnesses proving his request Meetings and Consults, and the last of them at his own house, and his express consent to the Matters debated and agreed upon, do put it beyond a Question to any man that desires not to be wilfully deceived, that the Crime of the Lord Russel was not a bare Misprision of Treason, but High Treason in the highest degree, being to raise a Rebellion against the K●ng, the Consequence whereof, in all probability, would have been the destruction of the King, and subversion of the Government, if not the desolation of the whole Kingdom.  
I after this plain Account of the Lord russel's Case, any persons be so hardy to think the Compiles of that P●per of greater skill in the Laws of the Land than the Reverend and Learned Judges, who have judged his Crime to be High Treason, the utmost comfort he can expect for his being deceived, is, that he shall have the like comfortable Speech prepared for him upon the like occasion.  
FINIS.   

EDINBURGH, Reprinted by the Heir of Andrew Anderson, Printer to His most Sacred Majesty. 1683.