An Account of a vindication of the English Catholicks from the pretended conspiracy against the life and government of His Sacred Majesty undertaking to discover the chief falsities and contradictions contained in the narrative of Titus Oates, &c.

SECT IX.

AND thus comes on his seventh Chapter, comprizing what the Deponent relates since his return to London, concerning Jesuites, from Sect. 33, to Sect. 53, inclusive. But upon Sections 33, and 34, we meet with nothing material; only the old miserable pretenses of the Jesuits denying all, and an odd kind of Inference from their keeping him bare of money, that they never made him privy to the Treasons which he hath now discovered. Of the very same strain are his Answers to Sections 35, 36, and 37, (pag. 24.) and have already been discussed. Upon Section 38, he makes a question whether, if any Jesuites had been design'd for Holland, they would have acquainted the Deponent with the receit of those Orders from Whitebread. He confutes Sections 39, 40, and 41, by opposing again a simple, verbal de∣nial to a positive and affirmative Oath. And excepts against Section 42, (pag. 25.) because the Letters there mentioned are not producible; expostulates with him for the Commotions he has raised here, by discovering their

Rogueries; and minds him of his danger. His Reply to Section 43, comes to thus much in effect, that no Jesuits were sent into Scotland, because he (this Observator) knows them not, he seeks to evade the stroke of Sect. 44. by disclaiming all correspondence with De la Chaize; and cavils at Section 45, without so much as knowing, why, or wherefore.

Section 46, (pag. 26.) will not down with him. 1. Because Wakeman was acquitted. 2. For that Pickering confess'd nothing at the Gallows. And 3. Because the Jesuits that the Letter there specified is charged upon, find themselves concern'd to disown it. What think you now? Are not all these sound and undenyable Evidences? But he goes on: and returns to Sect. 47, only a spiteful Reflection upon a converted Jesuite; which will bear an Inference to this purpose, that the Deponent being neither a Fool, nor a Mad∣man, was scarce look'd upon as fit to wipe their Reverences Shooes, whereas the other being (upon the Observator's Character of him) completely both, was readily adopted a Brother of the Society. He objects to Section 48, that there is no Heath of the Society; but presently recollects himself that there is one Heath (the Deponent never said there were two) that has (he says) been at Liege, ever since Jan. 1678. To Section 49, he opposes an improbable and uncharitable supposition, and the weakness of the Exe∣cuted's denyal to the Validity of the Deponents Proof. He dispatches Section 50, by repeating the pretence of Ireland's being at such a time in Stafford∣shire: the truth of which allegation was ever justly held suspected, and at length solemnly impeached upon Oath. And thus, with denying their own Ciphers; (pag. 27.) stroaking Jennison the Jesuite; scoffing at the Deposition of an intended Massacre; and perverting the Deponents words to make them speak Smith, a Jesuite; (for want of better Arguments) he passes over Sections 51, 52, and 53, and concludes this his Seventh Section.