The arraignment, tryal, and condemnation of Peter Cooke, Gent. for high-treason, in endeavouring to procure forces from France to invade this kingdom, and conspiring to levy war in this realm for assisting and abetting the said invasion, in order to the deposing of His sacred Majesty, King William, and restoring the late King Who upon full evidence was found guilty at the Sessions-House in the Old-Baily, on Wednesday the 13th of May, 1696. And received sentence the same day. With the learned arguments both of the King's and prisoner's council upon the new Act of Parliament for regulating tryals in cases of treason. Perused by the Lord Chief Justice Treby, and the council present at the tryal.

Die Mercurii Decimo Tertio Maii, Anno Dom. 1696.

The Court being met according to the Adjournment, the Pannel was called over, and the Defaulters Recorded, and several excused for Absence upon Sickness, and being out of Town before the Summons. Then Mr. Serjeant Darnall desired before the Jury was called, to move something against the Pannel: And made his Motion thus;

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

IF your Lordship pleases, I have somewhat to offer to you before you go upon this new Pannel; and I confess, I think it is my Duty to the Court, as well as to the Prisoner, to state the Case as it is, and submit it upon the reason of Law, and the Authorities that I shall offer, Whether the Proceedings upon this new Pannel will not be erroneous? My Lord, the Question is, Whether, as this Case is, the Prisoner has had a Copy of the Pannel of his Jury by which he is to be tried, according as the late Law requires, he had a Copy of the former Pannel, and upon that Pan∣nel Nine were sworn, and their Names all entred upon Record, and made Parcel of the Record. Thereof now the Question is, Whether he can be tried upon a new Pannel? We are in a Case that rarely happens, and in a Case of Life and Death. I know your Lordship will be careful not to vary from the ancient Practice, or to make a new President, because of the Conse∣quences. It must be agreed in this Case, That the old Pannel upon which the Prisoner took his Challenges, and of which Nine was sworn, is Parcel of the Record. Now, my Lord, to add a new Pannel, upon which twelve more shall be sworn, and all this appear upon Record, and the Prisoner tried upon the last Pannel, will not this be Error? I offer this before the Jury be called and sworn, because we desire to be fairly tried; and we design to rest upon the Fact in this Case. If it should appear, That he is tried upon a Pannel that is unduly made and return'd, that will be of evil Consequence one way or other. And can this be duly made, if another appear upon Record before it? And can any body say it is quasht or abated? Or can it be so? My Lord, in Stamford's Pleas of the Crown, p. 155. it is said, If any of the Pannel dye after the Return, and before their Appearance, so that there are not enough left to make the Jury, yet the Pannel shall not be quasht, nor is it ••bated, but it is Cause to grant a Tales. And certainly, my Lord, it is a stronger Case, when by reason of Challenges, which the Law gives the Prisoner liber∣ty to make, there are not enough left, that there shall not be a new Pannel, but that a Tales shall be granted; for if a new Pannel might be made, it cannot appear who were challenged, or who were admitted. And if your Lordship pleases to consider the Intention of the Law in giving the Prisoner power to Challenge, is, that he may have an indifferent Jury; but that would be prevented by such a practice as this; for when it has been discovered upon the old Pannel whom the Prisoner chose, and whom he challenged upon the new Pannel, the Persons challenged may be set first, and those that were chosen may be omitted, or so postponed, that none of them whom he thought equal to try him, can serve upon the Jury. And truly, my Lord, if I am rightly informed, that is the Case upon this new Pannel, some of those that were admitted and sworn are left out, and most of them, I think, are put last in the Pannel whom he thought equal Men to try him, and all those whom he challenged peremptorily, are the first Men in the Pannel. This, my Lord, is the Case before you, and if this be admitted, the use and end of Challenges, which are in be∣benefit

and favour of Life wou'd be defeated. And for Authorities in this Case, besides the Reason and Ground of the Law, many cannot be expected, because it is a Fact that rarely happens. I find none of the ancient Practicers ever knew it, but I find that a Tales ought to be granted, so it is said in several Books, as in Stamford, 155. 156. when ever upon the principal Pannel, all the Jury does not appear, or so many of them do not, that there are not enough left to make a Jury, which is our very Case; then in such Case the Pannel shall not be quasht or abated; but a Tales granted, so is 14 H. 7. 7. there the Question was, Whe∣ther there should be a greater Number returned upon the Tales then were in the principal Pannel, and there the Difference was insisted upon, and agreed, That where it is between Party and Party, where Life is not concerned, it shall not, but where Life is concerned, and the Prisoner has Power to Chal∣lenge 35 Peremptorily, there the Judge may award as many upon the Tales as he pleases, that there may be enough to remain after the Challenges; so that if this old Pannel be not abated, and cou'd not be quasht, and a Tales might be granted to consist of any Number, I conceive the Prisoner cannot be Tryed upon this new Pannel, but it will be Erroneous; and I humbly submit to your Lordships, whether you will proceed upon it.

Sir B. Shower,

If your Lordship pleases to spare me a Word of the same side, with Submission. We think there ought to have been an Habeas Corpora, with a Tales, such as had been before Sworn, being to be part of the Jury now, and that is the proper way to bring the Prisoner to his Tryal in this Case; the Kings Counsel cannot expect we shou'd produce many Presidents, for I believe this is the second of the kind that ever happened, at least, within Memory, That a Tryal in Treason was put off pro defectu Juratorum, though I have a Pre∣sident that I think is express in the Case; but we insist in the first place, That a Tales does lie at Common-Law, in the Case of Life; and so the Book that Mr. Serjeant cited in Stamford, is express; and then we say, that the Answer which we expect, that we are now before Justices of Goal Delivery, is not suf∣ficient, because the Justices of Goal-Delivery, though they do not usually a∣ward Process by way of Writ, but before their coming, they Command the Sheriff to have his County ready there, and so in Fact, it is a Parol Precept; yet when it is return'd, then it is entred upon Record, either Preceptum est Vice Comiti quod venire faceret; or, Ideo veniat Jurata; and the Jury are en∣tred upon Record: So that take it to be before Justices of Goal-Delivery, yet the Sheriff having returned a Pannel, and that being upon the File, as appears before your Eyes, in Obedience to your Command, and that Copy of the Pannel being delivered to us two Days before Saturday last, we humbly submit it to your Lordship, Whether by force of the Common-Law, and of the late Act of Parliament, we ought not to be Tryed by that Pannel; we insist upon it, that the Act intends, and expresly designed, that not only the Prisoner shou'd have a Copy of the Pannel that the Sheriff return'd at any time after, but that he shou'd be Tryed by the Pannel that we had a Copy of at first; for it is not said a Copy, toties quoties the Court shall think fit to award a Precept for a new Pannel, but the Words of the Act are a Copy of the Jury duly returned by the Sheriff; now this we had, and your Lordship knows it is not a return'd Pannel till it be in Court, and then it becomes part of the Record: My Lord, I do agree the Justices in some Cases have quasht and set aside Pannels and Juries, and ordered new ones; and I confess there was an extraordinary Case in the time of King Charles the Second, which was upon the Indictment against White∣bread, where, after the Jury Charged, and Evidence given, the Jury was dis∣charged, and a new Pannel made the next Sessions, upon which Whitebread was Tryed and Convicted; how just or regular that was, I will not insist upon

now, but I am sure there were great Complaints of that Practice, and few Presi∣dents can be shewn of the like; but besides the Parties themselves waved it there, no Objection being taken against it, but we insist upon it in this Case, that this being upon Record, is part of the Record, and so appears to the Court; if the Record indeed were to be made up upon a Writ of Error, perhaps it wou'd be no Error▪ because it may be they wou'd leave it out; but here it ap∣pears there was a Pannel of Record before you, and this must either be quasht, or altered, or continued on by Process, you have power to quash it, it it be unduely returned by the Sheriff. If there be any evil Practices for procuring the Pannel, either by the Prosecutor, or the Prisoner, if there be no Free∣holders return'd, or the same happen in any other respect not to be le∣gally done according to the Command or Precept of the Court; but because there is a Default of appearance of Jurors, no Pannel was ever quasht upon that Account; then say we, if it be not quasht, this Pannel must continue. For, what shall become of it, why should it not continue? It is not within the Act of Parliament, that gives the Justices Power to make a new Pannel, as in the Case of a grand Jury, when they are guilty of Concealments, or re∣fuse to find Bills upon great Evidence, but we have no such Case before you, nor do I know any such Rule as can reach this; so that we take it, there is no difference between this Case, as before Justices of Goal-Delivery, and other Justices; that Process does lie against the Jury that does not appear even in Treason and Felony, there is no Dispute, and it is very properly so, if it be before Commissioners of Oyer and Terminer; first a Venire facias, and then up∣on Default, a Habeas Corpora, that is the proper way; then take it before Ju∣stices of Goal-Delivery, there it is entered upon Record, Preceptum est Vice Co∣miti. &c. And here is a Pannel returned by vertue of this Precept, and some of the Jury do not appear, and so there are not enough to Try the Prisoner after a great many Sworn and Challenged, and this entered upon Record. What shall become of that Pannel, it cannot be quasht, nor abated? My Lord, there is a Case that does Warrant that Opinion of a Tales in a Case of Felony; and if there may be a Tales, then there may be an Habeas Corpora, and there are Directions how the Jurors shall be Sworn again, upon their appearance on the Habeas Corpora; and that is Wharton's Case in Telverton, 23.

Mr. J. Powell,

Jun. Do not dispute that, it is plain, That a Tales does lie in Felony, upon a Commission of Oyer and Terminer; but can you shew me. Sir Bartholomew, any where, that upon a Commission of Goal-Delivery a Tales does lie?

Sir B. Shower,

Sir. I can only shew the Reason of the Law, and I cannot find that does contradict what we now contend for.

Mr. J. Powell▪

I tell you Sir Bartholomew, there is no Tales but with a Ha∣beas Corpora to bring in the first Jurors, and that cannot be upon a Parol Pre∣cept on a Commission of Oyer and Terminer, there goes a Venire facias, which is a Writ upon which the Habeas Corpora may be grounded, but there is no Venire facias upon a Commission of Goal-Delivery.

Sir B. Shower,

Why shou'd there not be a Precept in nature of an Habeas Corpora for a Jury return'd, upon a Precept as well as on a Writ?

Mr. J. Powell,

No, it never was done, the Commission of Goal-Delivery 〈◊〉〈◊〉 a general Commission that does Authorize the Sheriff to impannel, and ••ave a Jury ready at the day appointed, for the Delivery of the Goal, to Try the Prisoners; it doth import in it self a general Precept for that purpose, be∣fore Issue joyned, which the Sheriff cannot do in the Case of a Commission of Cyer and Terminer, but must have a Writ of Venire facias, after Issue joyned.

Mr. Sol. Gen.

In all the Cases that they cite, there is a Writ of Venire facias, upon which the after Process, by Writ, may be grounded; but here is no Foundation for any future Process by Writ, because it is only by Parol Precept.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Sure these Gentlemen don't think what they say, the Pan∣nel is not part of the Record, and there is no Record of it, nothing but the Clerks Entry in a Paper, or Note, for his own Memorandum.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

Brother Darnal, have you any Book that says, Justices of Goal-Delivery must award a Tales upon default of the Jurors.

Mr. Serj Darnal,

No my Lord, I cannot say so.

L C. J. Treby,

Suppose all the Jury had been challenged, or dy'd.

Mr. J. Powell,

there cou'd be no quashing of it, but it wou'd fall of it self, for want of a Jury.

Mr. J. Rokeby,

If, according to your Doctrine, we must keep to the first Pannel, the Consequence wou'd be, there wou'd be no Tryal at all.

Sir B. Shower,

Stamford makes no difference that I can see.

Mr. Att. Gen.

But these Gentlemen have been told the difference, upon which this Matter is grounded, a Tales cannot be without a Habeas Corpora, and a Habeas Corpora cannot be without a Venire facias, but a Commission of Goal Delivery cannot award a Venire facias, because that is not to be award∣ed till Issue joyned.

Mr. B. Powis.

The return of this Pannel before Justices of Goal-Delivery, is an Act of the Sheriff, by vertue of the Commission, and nothing appears of Record till the Jury are Sworn.

Mr. J. Rokeby,

They object that it is upon Record

L. C. J. Treby.

By the Record, they mean the Clerk's Note.

Mr. Att Gen.

If you please to look upon the Indictment, there is no En∣try at all, and that is all the Record before you

Mr. J. Powell,

Does it appear upon Record, that Nine were Sworn.

Mr. Baker,

No, there is nothing upon the Record.

C. of. Arr.

It does not appear till the Record is made up, and nothing is entered till Twelve are Sworn.

Mr. Serj. Darnal.

There will be a great inconvenience, if a Pannel may be changed at any time.

Mr. J Powel,

This is a Case that never happened before, and may be never may again.

Sir B. Shower,

The Law will hold the same, in case it does appear upon Record, as well as where it does not; but we say, a Pannel return'd in Court is a Record.

Mr. J. Powell,

No, it will not, because, when a Jury does appear, and the Twelve are sworn, then it becomes parcel of the Record; and therefore White∣bread's Case was quite another Case, and was indeed held to be an extraordi∣nary Case, but that comes not up to this, for there a full Jury was Sworn, and Evidence given.

Mr. Serj. Darnal,

It may be the same Jury will not be returned:

Mr. J. Powell▪

But if you have a Copy of the Jury, you are at no Mischief.

Mr. Serj. Darnal,

Some that were in the former Pannel are quite left out.

Mr. Sher. Buck.

There are none left out, but what were not Freeholders▪ that I know of.

Mr. B. Powis,

He says the Fact is not true as you have alledged it.

Mr. Sher. Buck.

And Mr. Serjeant Darnal has been pleased to reflect upon us, as if we had packt this Jury, by altering the places of the Names, which,

my Lord, we do utterly deny, and we only left out those that were not Free-holders.

Mr. B. Powis.

The Sheriff sayes he has not postponed any of them, and only left out those, that were not Free-holders.

Mr. Ser. Darnal.

If the Law were as plain with us as the Fact in that Case, we should have a very good Case of it.

Mr. Sher. Buckingham.

Mr. Serjeant I have both the Pannels here, they may be compared.

Mr. Ser. Darnal.

I said no harm, Mr. Sheriff, nor meant any Reflection up∣on you.

Mr. Sher. Buckingham.

Mr. Serjeant was pleased to say, the excepted men were put in the Front, and those that were sworn were put last.

L. C. J. Treby.

There is nothing at all in the Objection.

Mr. J. Powel.

Really, because it was opened as a Reflection, it will be pro∣per for the Sheriff to clear it.

Mr. Sher. Buckingham.

My Lord, the answer I give to it, is, that particu∣larly one that was sworn last time, is now at the very beginning of the Pannel, and in general they are mixt promiscuously, without any design or study in the least. He sayes we have left out those that served before. I solemnly protest, I know not one Man Returned upon the last Pannel that is left out, unless it appeared that he is no Free-holder, and we had no reason to put in them, that we knew could not serve.

Mr. Serj. Darnal.

That can't appear to us, that they are not Free-holders.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

But it appears to him, and therefore he did well to leave them out.

Mr. Sher Buckingham.

What I say, I am ready to give upon my Oath.

Mr. Serj. Darnal.

I say there is one Henry Beadle left out, and he was one that was sworn.

Mr. Sher. Buckingham.

I will not say for a particular man, I protest, that I did not know he was left out. If it be so, it was by mistake; for I know Mr. Beadle very well, and I take him to be an honest man, and very well affected to the Government, as any man.

Mr. Serj. Darnal.

We desire to be tryed by men that are honest and well affected to the Government.

Mr. Sher. Buckingham.

There you have of them, Sir.

Mr. Serj. Darnal

Those that were sworn are put last of all, and there is not above one of them that is within possibility of coming on again.

Mr. Sher. Buckingham.

It will appear by Mr. Cooks Challenges, and the o∣ther Pannel, that they stood late before, and Thomas Clark, who was sworn the last time, stands tenth man upon the Pannel.

Mr. Ser. Darnal.

He was sworn after we had gone through the Pannel, and took all our Challenges, not appearing at first.

Mr. Sher. Buckingham.

I tell you they stand for the most part as they did, for ought I know.

Mr. Ser. Darnal.

There is but one in threescore and ten, that can be sworn now, of them that were sworn before, and there were nine of them then sworn.

Mr. Attor. Gen.

That is a mistake. Indeed there are a great many added to the Pannel, because there was a defect the last time, and therefore now they may perhaps stand later.

Mr. Ser. Darnal.

I do not speak to reflect upon the Sheriffs: I go accor∣ding to my Instructions.

Mr. J. Powel.

If it had been so it had been well enough for you must be

contented, the Court must take it as the Sheriff returns it, and you have a Copy of it.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Here are four of them that were sworn before, that stood above sixty off in the old Pannel.

Mr. Sher. Buck.

The first Man that was sworn, Mr. Sherbrook, stands with∣in the first Twelve now (as well as before.)

Mr. J. Powell,

If they had been all new, there had been nothing in that.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

Truly, I can't see but that the Sheriff hath done like an e∣qual, just, fair, and honest Officer.

Mr. Att. Gen.

They may challenge as they will.

L. C. J. Treby.

You are to consider, that this happens, because you run out as far as your utmost Number, that time you challenged thirty five per∣emptorily, and divers others for Cause; so as not to leave enough for a Jury, and from that alone arose a necessity of increasing the Number of the Pannel.

Mr. Serj. Darnal,

It was our Client that challenged them, we do not advise him whom to challenge.

Mr. J Rokeby,

But you must take the consequence of it, which causes this addition to the Pannel.

L C. J. Treby,

What do you complain of? they that are returned, are put in the same order as they were before; they that were sworn, were (for the most part) late in the Pannel then, and so they are now. I do not find any thing done to the prejudice of the Prisoner.

Mr. Serj Darnal,

If the Christian Names had not been mistaken, there had been perhaps enough to have been sworn.

L. C. J Treby,

That's a good Argument for a new Pannel, because the Christian Names were mistaken before.

Mr. J Powell,

It was by defect of Jurors, and therefore there was an abso∣lute necessity of a new Pannel.

L. C. J Treby,

I am of the same Opinion.

Wharton's Case is well known. It was much cited, as to another Point in Bushel's Case. It was a Tryal at the King's Bench Bar at Westminster by a Jury of Kent, upon an Indictment of Murther.

And I think you say the Case of H. 7. was between party and party in Appeal. And I believe Stamford's Discourse, in the place cited, relates chiefly to Appeals.

I shall not deny that a Tales may possibly be upon an Indictment before Ju∣stices of Oyer and Terminer. Though 'tis not usual, nor do you shew, or our experienced Clerks know any such President. I agree, that in the mentioned Cases, a Tales was proper. For, in both those Cases (viz. of Appeal and In∣dictment removed into the King's Bench) the Process for the Jury was, as it ought to be, by Writs of Venire facias, &c. upon which a full Jury not ap∣pearing, there must be a Tales. But in proceeding to Tryal before Justices of Oyer and Terminer, on such Indictment as is here, though I will not say but they may proceed by Writ of Venire facias: Yet I do say, that the more known Course is by Precept, in nature of a Venire facias. And the usage is, that After (and never Before) the Prisoner hath pleaded Not Guilty, there goes a Precept to the Sheriff under the Seals of the said Justices of Oyer and Terminer, returnable at such day as they shall Adjourn to, for returning a Jury to Try it.* 1.1 (as was done lately, upon Advice, in the Case of Rook∣wood, &c.) And upon the return of that, if, after Challenges, there are not enough left to make a Jury, whether those Justices shall issue a Pre∣cept

in nature of a Habeas Corpora, or Distringas with a Tales, or another Precept in the same form as before, and without taking notice of the former, is a Question not in Judgment before us. For, we are about proceeding to a Tryal on an Indictment in this Court of Goal-Delivery, (which is the Court wherein generally all capital Crimes are Tryed, as well at this Place, as at the Assizes.) And, I think, Here cannot be a Tales. I am sure it is not ne∣cessary. For, First, Here is never any Writ of Venire facias, &c. Secondly, Nor ever a Precept for returing a Jury to Try a particular Issue. But this Court takes the Pannels of Jurys returned by the Sheriff without any parti∣cular Precept to him.

The Course of proceeding by vertue of a Commission of Goal-Delivery, which is the Law in this case, is this, viz. There is, Antecedent to the com∣ing of the Justices, a General Commandment, or Precept made in Writing, to the Sheriff by the said Justices, to return Juries against their coming, for the Trying of all and singular Prisoners in their Goal, whether they have pleaded before, or shall after. And for that purpose it requires the Sheriff to Sum∣mon, out of all parts of his County, whence the Prisoners come, a great Number of Freeholders, not a Kin to the Prisoners, to be at the time and place appointed for holding the Court. The Sheriff, by vertue of this ge∣neral previous Precept, summoneth many for Jurors, and prepares divers se∣veral Pannels of their Names, either at first, or afterwards, as appears necessa∣ry, and returneth and delivereth in one or more of these Pannels from time to time, as the Court does need, and call for any. This, we know, in Fact, is frequently done where the Sessions of Goal-Delivery lasts several days, and there is occasion. Though, in supposition of Law, all these Pannels are re∣turned, and the Tryals thereupon had the first day of the Sessions; and in Law it is intended to be but that one day only. The return of this Precept is thus, viz. Executio istius Precepti patet in quibusdam Pann••llis huic precepto annexis, and the Pannels are annexed, and there are often Filed here divers Pannels upon the same general Precept, though sometimes but One. These Pannels are thus delivered into Court, and a Jury taken out of them, as there is occasion, only upon a Parol Award, that is, barely the Court's calling for the same, without Writ or Precept in Writing, or giving any Day for the do∣ing it. For, this Proceeding is immediatè, for the speedy delivery of Priso∣ners; and the Entry after setting forth that the Prisoner being Arraigned, pleads Not Guilty, is Ideo immediatè veniat inde Jurata; or fiat inde Jurata. And this Court's being instituted for the speedy delivery of Prisoners, and Warnings being given long before, of their coming, are the Causes why it has been always held without Doubt, that Justices of Goal-Delivery might in∣quire and Try the same day.

If it fall out that, by Reason of Defaults, Deaths, or Challenges, there cannot be a full Jury had out of a Pannel, (as here there wanted three) which is an Accident that the Court cannot know, till they have gone through the Pannel; I think in this Case, that Pannel goes for nothing, is utterly lost and void, and to be cast away or cancelled; For, it does not answer the Award of the Court, which was to have a Jury to Try the Prisoner presently. It is meant an effectual Pannel that should af∣ford a full Jury of Twelve unacceptionable Men. And every Pannel that comes short in this, is to be laid aside as a void thing. And then the Court takes and makes use of another immediately, which may not be deficient, whereby the Award is observed, and the present Service dispatched:

Object. It is objected, that the Old Pannel is parcel of the Record in Court,

and, upon that, Nine were sworn, and their Names are all enter'd upon that Record; and now to add a new Pannel, upon which Twelve shall be sworn and Try the Prisoner; all this appearing upon Record, it will be Error.

Answ. This Objection stands upon two Mistakes, both arising from not ob∣serving the difference between Precepts and Pannels, in a Court of Goal-Delivery, and Venire facias's, or Precepts and Pannels in other Courts.

1. It supposes that here will be two Pannels, which will appear to relate to the Tryal of this Prisoner Mr. Cook. 2. It supposes that both these will be∣come Records, or parcel of the Record in Court.

If either of these Suppositions prove to be a mistake, it will destroy the Objection. I think Both are mistakes.

1. Here is not, nor will be, nay, there ought not to be any Pannel purporting to be returned for the Trying of Mr. Cook, or any particular Prisoner or Prisoners. For, the Precept in this Case is (not like a Venire facias which alwaies respects a particular Issue between Parties therein named, but) General, requiring the Sheriff to return Jurors enough to Try all the Priso∣ners, not naming any. And the Return, which is the Answer to it by a Pannel or Pannels, is as General; the Title of every Pannel, being No∣mina Jurator ad Triandum pro Domino Rege, and no more; or Nomina Jura∣torum ad Triandum inter Dom. Regem & Prisonar▪ ad Barram, without naming any of the Prisoners. And it were absurd if it should be other∣wise. For, the Precept goes to the Sheriff Before the Sessions, and his Return is supposed to be made at the Beginning of the Sessions, when it is not known who of the Prisoners will be indicted; or, if indicted, who will plead not Guilty, or Guilty, or a Pardon, or other Plea.

When, for the Tryal of a particular Prisoner (or divers Prisoners that are thought fit to be put upon Tryal by the same Jury) a Jury is about to be taken out of any Pannel, the Clerk, as he goes along, may take a Note in Paper of the Name of every one that is sworn, or he may (and usually doth) write, Jur. on the said Pannel against the Name of every one sworn. But this Note or Mark is no part of the Record; it is not ex Institu∣tione Legis▪ it is but a voluntary Memorandum, for the help of his Memory. If he could safely trust to the strength of his Memory, he need not write at all on this occasion; I mean, not till a full Jury is sworn, who Try the Prisoner. But then, indeed, the Clerk must, (from his Notes, or Memo∣ry) write the Names of all the Twelve, entring them on the Record of the Indictment, in this manner, viz. just after the Ideo immediatè veniat inde Ju∣rata coram prefatis Justic▪ &c. Adding, Et Juratores Jurate illius, &c. Scil. A. B. &c. Dicunt, &c. And it is by this only, that the Names of those that are sworn, come to be of Record; and it is this entry upon the Body of the Indictment alone, that is the Record, that shews who were Jurors sworn, to Try this, or that, or other Prisoner, or Prisoners.

So that, if the old Pannel were Filed, and were a Record, as the Prisoner's Council would suppose, yet it would not thereby be made appear, that the said Pannel was returned, or used for, or in order to the Tryal of this Pri∣soner.

2. The old Pannel is not filed among the Records of the Court, nor ought to be. When such a Pannel does not produce a Jury, the Clerks may and use to throw it by, as a useless thing. But, however they use it, we cannot allow it to be a Record. It was received de bene esse; It is abortive and comes to nothing. And it is not every thing that passeth in Court in or∣der

to a Record, that comes to be so. A Frivolous Plea, that is rejected, is not Recorded. A Presentment or Bill of Indictment, before it is found, is not a Record▪ And if an Ignoramus be returned upon a Bill of Indictment, it ne∣ver can be a Record. And, thereupon, the Clerks do sometimes throw it away, tho sometimes they keep it and put it on the File, only taking care to cross it, but if they do forget to cross it, yet it is not a Record.

By all this it is apparent how great the difference is between a Precept and Pannels in this Court, and a Venire facias and a Pannel returned there∣upon, which is ever issued after Issue joyned, and doth alwayes mention the particular Parties and Matter it relates to, and is a Record, and a ground for an H••beas Corpora wich a Tales, to be returnable at a certain future day.

But, in this Case in this Court, it is quite otherwise.

Sir B. Shower.

Then, my Lord, since there is a new Pannel, we hope we stand in the same condition upon the Act of Parliament, to take Excepti∣ons to the Indictment before this Jury sworn, as we did before the other Jury sworn, since all that is quite set aside.

L. Ch. J. Treby.

Yes truly, I think that may be.

Mr. Attorn, Gen.

But these Gentlemen would have done well to have gi∣ven notice of their Exceptions.

Sir B. Shewer.

My Lord, I shall not stand upon an Exception which I think I might take to the word Turmas in the Indictment, which whether it be Troops of Men, or Horses, or what it is does not appear; but, I think, we have an Exception to the cheif Overt Act laid in the Indictment, and that we presume, if my Brief be right, will be sufficient to set aside this Indict∣ment: The Indictment charges, That Mr. Cook did agree with other Tray∣tors to send Mr. Chernock into France to the said late King James, and King Jam••s is never mentioned before in all the Indictment, that is one Exception that we have, that there is no late K. James mentioned in the Indictment before this, if my Copy be right, if it be otherwise, I suppose, they will find it: it is laid, that Mr. Cook did agree to send Cherneck as a Messenger into France, eidem nuper Regi Jacobo, and no Rex Jacobus mentioned before. Then there is another Exception, and that's this, They come and say, that whereas there was a War with France, which is only in the Indictment by way of recital or rehearsal of an History, Quod cum per magnum Tempus suit & mode fit, &c. Mr. Cook the Premisses knowing, did compass and imag••ne the Kings death, and did adhere to the said Kings Enemies such a day. Now, my Lord, I do think, that this can never be maintained, for that Cum quoddam Bellum, &c. being an Historical Narrative, is not positive enough: For adhereing to the Kings Enemies, being one of the Treasons laid in the Charge, there ought to be a War at the time of the adhesion, and of necessity then that ought to be presented by the Jury; for tho your Lordships can Judicially take notice of War or Peace, yet you cannot take notice of it at such a particular time, and the reason is from the Notion that is in my Lord Coke in his 3d, Institutes, Cap. Treason. That adhesions to Rebels is not adhesion to the Kings Enemies; for a Rebel is not said to be an Enemy, but it must be adhereing to such an Enemy, as between whom and the King there was War at that time, and consequently it ought to be more positively averred in the Indictment, than it here is: but as to the Overt Act of Mr. Cooks consulting and agreeing to send Chernock over to the said late King James to give him notice of what was agreed upon between them, when King James is not named before, that can never be got over with submis∣sion

Mr. Baker.

It is a mistake of your Copy, Sir Bartholomew Shower.

Mr. Att. Gen.

I have looked into the Record, and it is Jacobo Secundo nuper Regi, not Dicto.

Sir B. Shower.

Then with submission, my Lord, they cannot try us now, for we ought to have a true Copy of the Indictment.

Mr. Baker.

Upon Demand. But you never demanded it.

Sir Barth. Shower.

Yes, it was demanded.

Mr. Baker.

Who demanded it? Sir B. Shower. Our Sollicitor Burleigh.

Mr. Baker.

No, he did not, I gave it him officiously.

Mr. Att. Gen.

With submission, my Lord, it is no Objection at all, that their Copy is wrong. That should have been before the Prisoner had pleaded; for the words of the Act are, that he shall have it so many days before, to enable him to plead, and he cannot be put to plead unless he have a Copy of the Indictment so long before: and at Rookwood's Tryal it was said by the Court it could not be alleged after Plea pleaded.

Mr. Burleigh.

The Copy was given to me publickly in Court.

Mr. Soll. Gen.

Why did not your Sollicitor compare it with the Indictment?

Mr. Att. Gen.

They might have compared it by the Clerk's reading it to them; but they will not admit the Prisoner's Sollicitor to see the Original, because the Act expresly says they shall not have a Copy of the Witnesses Names.

Sir B. Shower.

The Officer is to deliver a true Copy of the Indictment.

Mr. Att. Gen.

No; the Party is to demand it by himself or his Agent, and then he is to have it; and if he be denied he ought to apply himself to the Court, who will order the Delivery of it; but we stand upon it that they cannot take this Exception now after they have pleaded, for the intent of the Copy is to enable him to plead.

L. C. J. Treby.

The Copy, by the Act of Parliament, is to be delivered to the Prisoner, his Attorney, Agent or Sollicitor, if they require the same, and here it seems there was no requiring of it, but it was voluntarily given, and now you have lapsed your time of making the Exception of wanting a Copy by having pleaded to the Indictment, whereby you have in effect admitted and declared, either that you had a true Copy of it, or that you did not think fit to require one; for the use of the Copy is to better enable the Pri∣soner to plead. But when you did plead, you took upon your self to be well able to plead without the help of a Copy, which you might have had up∣on the asking for.

Sir B. Shower.

Then, my Lord, there is another thing in the Indictment▪ that in this Overt-Act there is a new Time, and a new Place, and a new Verb, and a new Fact alleged, and no Nominative Case; it is alleged that Peter Cook at first with others did so and so; and then the first of July to bring the Treasons aforesaid to effect, there & alibi, &c. (which is very loose, for I know not whence the Venue must come) did traiterously with Chernock, Friend, &c. consult to procure Diversas Turmas & Legiones, &c. to join with them in England, and then it comes & ulterius such a Day, Year and Place, did traiterously agree so and so, and not say who: now this is neither by express words nor Rule of Grammar to be referred to the Prisoner at the Bar, it does not say Ipse Idem Petrus Cook; now, my Lord, that the King's Counsel thought it necessary in every OvertAct is plain, because those words are put in every other Clause of the Indictment, in those Clauses that goe before and those Clauses that come after; then if they will take it, that this Clause must refer to the next Antecedent, that will not do, for the next precedent Nominative Case is either Friend or Chernock. So that this is without a Nominative Case, and the Presidents in my Lord Coke's Entries 361, and all the other Books have the Nominative Case repeated,

where there is a new Time, and a new Place, and a new Fact alleged: now it might be true that the Prisoner at the Bar might be present, and this same Treason might be discoursed of and agitated, and there might be a Consult about this Business, and yet it is not necessarily implied that he must consent and agree to send Chernock into France, upon which the great stress of the Indictment lies: therefore we say, these words having no Nomi∣native Case, the Indictment cannot hold.

Mr. Att. Gen.

My Lord, as to this Objection it will receive a very plain Answer. Our Indictment begins and sets forth that Peter Cook, the Prisoner at the Bar, did imagine and compass the King's Death, and did adhere to the King's Enemies, and these are the Treasons; and then it sets forth the O∣vert Act, that in Execution of the traiterous Compassings, Imaginations and Adhesions aforesaid. Ipse Idem Petrus Cook together with Sir William Parkins, Mr. Chernock, Sir John Friend and others, did propose and consult to pro∣cure from the French King Forces to invade this Land & ulterius he and they did agree to send Chernock to the late King James.

Mr. J. Rookeby.

There's the first naming of James the Second, late King of England, and there is no eidem Jacobo I promise you.

L. C. J. Treby.

Well, that Mistake is over. Pray go on Mr. Attorney General.

Mr. Att. Gen.

My Lord, as to this Objection of Sir Barth. Shower, he would have Ipse Idem Petrus repeated over again, and he says that we lay a distinct Over-Act with a different Time and Place. Now that is a mistake too, it is not a different Time and Place, but the same Time and Place; and it men∣tions that cum. R. Chernock, J. Friend, &c. & cum aliis Proditoribus conve∣niebat. consultabat. &c. Which he says may refer to Sir J. Friend or Char∣nock: but if you look into the Frame of the Sentence that can never be.

Mr. J. Rookeby.

Petrus Cook is the Nominative Case that governs all the Verbs.

Mr. Att. Gen.

And there is no other Nom. Case in all the Indictments but Petrus Cook except it be in a Parenthesis, and that saves the Rule of Gram∣mar if there were any thing in it, that it must refer to the last antecedent.

Sir B. Shower.

When it comes to the Clause that he did procure Horse and Arms, there the Nominative Case is repeated.

L. C. J. Treby.

It would not have made it worse, if they had made it so here, but the Question is whether it be necessary.

Sir B. Shower.

Indictments ought to be precisely certain, but this we say is not so.

Mr. Att. Gen.

But here is as much certainty as to the Person, as can be, that he did consult with such and such about such things, and further the same Day did agree with the same Traytors to do so and so.

Mr. J. Powell.

Indictments it is true ought to be plain and clear, but I do not see but here is as much certainty as can be that he did such a Day consult, and further the same Day did agree with the same Persons.

Sir. B. Shower.

VVho did agree, my Lord?

Mr. J. Powell.

He that did consult with them before, and that is Peter Cook.

Mr. Att. Gen.

You'd have had us to have put it to every Verb, I be∣lieve.

Sir. B. Shower.

In Indictments no Presumption ought to be used, but the Facts ought to be directly and positively alleged.

Mr. J. Powell.

Its true there should be no Presumption, and there is none here, for certainly this is a plain Assertion of Fact.

L. C. J. Treby.

Here are two things that are set forth; First, That Peter

Cook did meet with Sir John Friend, Sir William Parkyns, and others, and then and there did consult with them, and consent to procure an Invasion, and joyn an Insurrection thereto. And, Secondly, Further with the said Traytors did agree to send Chernock into France. Now, what is the Nominative Case to this Agreement? Is it Sir John Friend, and Sir William Parkyns? That's impossible; for they could not be said properly to meet and consult with themselves, every one of them with his own self and the rest: And then the Number, if it had referr'd to them, should have been Plural, but here it is Singular [agreavit] and the sense is no more than this; That then and there Mr. Cook did meet with such Persons, and did consult with them about such and such Matters, and further, did agree with them to do thus.

Sir B. Shower.

The meaning is not to be forced and strained by Inference or Presumption, but it ought to be express and plain.

L. C. J. Treby.

Nay, you cannot express it better; you may make a Tau∣tology of it if you will.

Sir B. Shower.

The Paragraph is long, my Lord, and therefore requires the more care to have those Repetitions that are necessary.

L. C. J. Treby.

Your Objection to this Paragraph is, that it is too long; but repeating the same Nominative Case to every Verb, would make it much longer.

Sir B. Shower.

It cannot be understood to mean Peter Cook without Pre∣sumption, which ought not to be in an Indictment.

Mr. Att. Gen.

And as to Sir Bar. Shower's first Objection, his Copy is right too, and he mistook the place.

Sir B. Shower.

You shou'd have given me that for an Answer.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Nay, you should have taken more care, and not have made the Objection.

L. C. J. Treby.

Truly, I think it is hardly possible to have made this better if it had been otherwise than it is.

Mr. Serj. Darnel.

My Lord, we think we have a good Fact of it, which we rely upon, and therefore do not so much insist upon these Exceptions, tho, in duty to our Client, we mention that which we think is necessary, and we sub∣mit to your Lordship.

Cl. of Arr.

Set Peter Cook to the Bar. [Which was done] You, the Pri∣soner at the Bar, these good Men which you shall hear called, and personally appear, are to pass between our Sovereign Lord the King and you, upon Tryal of your Life and Death; if therefore you wou'd challenge them, or any of them, your time is to speak unto them as they come to the Book to be sworn, and before they be sworn.

Cryer.

Call Sir John Sweetapple.

Sir John Swetapple.

Here.

Cook.

My Lord Chief Justice, if your Lordship please, I am advised—

L. C. J. Treby.

Pray Sir speak out that we may hear what you say, and let the Cryer make proclamation for silence.

[Which was done.]

Cook.

My Lord, before the Jury is called, I am advised, that if any of the Jury have said already that I am guilty or they will find me guilty, or I shall suffer, or be hanged, or the like, they are not fit or proper Men to be of the Jury.

L. C. J. Treby.

You say right, Sir, it is a good cause of Challenge.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

That will be a sufficient cause, if, when they come to the Book, you object that, and be ready to prove it.

Cook.

Which is Sir John Sweetapple?

[He was shewn to him.]

Cl. of Arr.

There he is.

Cook.

I challenge him.

Cl. of Arr.

William Walker.

Cook.

Sir, have you said any such thing, that you believe me guilty?

Mr. Walker.

No, Sir.

Mr. Baker.

My Lord, he is asking of the Jury-Man the Question.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

That's a Fact the Prisoner should prove upon him.

Mr. Att. Gen.

My Lord, he must not ask the Jury that Question, Whether they have declared before, that they will find him guilty; that is to make them guilty of a Misdemeanor.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Is it any Misdemeanor for me to say, I think or believe such a Man is guilty.

Mr. Att. Gen.

If he be summon'd to be of a Jury, and declare his Opinion before hand, it is a Misdemeanor.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

But suppose it be before he was summon'd?

Mr. Att. Gen.

If you make any such Objection, you must prove it, and not out of the Jurymans own Mouth.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

I think any Man, my Lord, that comes to serve upon the Jury, may be ask'd any Question that does not make him guilty of any Offence or Crime, or liable to any Punishment: Now if any of these Gentlemen that are return'd upon this Pannel, before the Summons have declared their Opi∣nion, that the Prisoner is guilty, or ought to suffer, with Submission, the Prisoner may ask such a Question, Whether he have said so, yea or no?

Mr. J. Powell.

He cannot upon a Voyer Dire be ask'd any such Question.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

It is not denyed to be a material Objection, but it must be made out by Proof.

L. C. J. Treby.

You put it too large, Brother Daruall, you may ask upon a Voyer Dire, whether he have any Interest in the Cause; nor shall we deny you liberty to ask whether he be fitly qualified, according to Law, by having a Freehold of sufficient Value; but that you can ask a Juror or a Witness every Question that will not make him criminous, that's too large: Men have been ask'd whether they have been convicted and pardon'd for Felony, or whether they have been whipt for Petty Lacinary; but they have not been obliged to answer; for, tho their Answer in the affirmative will not make them crimi∣nal or subject them to Punishment, yet they are Matters of Infamy; and if it be an infamous thing, that's enough to preserve a Man from being bound to answer. A pardon'd Man is not guilty, his Crime is purged; but merely for the Reproach of it, it shall not be put upon him to answer a Question whereon he will be forced to forswear or disgrace himself. So Persons have been excused from answering whether they have been committed to Bridewell as Pilferers or Vagrants, or to Newgate for Clipping or Coining. &c. Yet to be suspected or committed is only a Misfortune and Shame, no Crime. The like has been observed in other Cases of odious and infamous matters which were not Crimes indictable. But to keep to our Case; 'Tis true, a Juror may be challenged being an Alien. or being a Villain; but where the Matter apparently carries Crime or Shame, it should be proved; the Outlawry should be proved, and so should the being a Villain. Yet that is no Crime, tho it be an Ignominy.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

But, my Lord, I take this to be no manner of Infamy at all, there is nothing of Crime, nor nothing of Reproach, but only a de∣claring of a Mans Opinion.

L. C. J. Treby.

Truly, I think otherwise; I take it to be at least a scandalous Misbehaviour, and deservedly ill spoken of, for any Man to pre-judge, especial∣ly in such a heinous matter. I think it is a very shameful discovery of a Man's Weakness and Rashness; if not Malice, to judge before he hears the Cause, and before the party that is accused could be tryed. But, it seems, by what the Prisoner says that he would ask all the Jurors, whether they have not said, that he was guilty, or that they would find him guilty, or that he should be hanged, or the like: Which (presuming him innocent) is to ask whether they have not defamed and slandered him in the highest degree; and to force them to dis∣cover that they have a mortal Hatred to him, and come with a malicious reso∣lution to convict him: Which admitting they are not punishable by our Law,

yet are things so detestably wicked and so scandalous as are not fit to be re∣quired to be disclosed by and against themselves,

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Pray, my Lord, what is more common than for a Man to say, before he is summoned to be upon a Jury, when he hears a Fact repor∣ted concerning such a one, to say I believe he is guilty, or I am of opinion he is, and I am sure he will be hanged, and yet there is no crime in this.

L. C. J. Treby.

Truly, Bro. Darnall, I know not how you may approve of such a Man, but I'll assure you I do not. I take the Question not to be concerning a Man's discoursing suppositively; as, if upon hearing News, or a Report of clear Evidence, a Man should say, Supposing this to be true, such a Man is guilty, and I should find him so if I were of his Jury. This might not be sufficient to set aside a Juror: for this has been a general Discourse among the Subjects upon occasion of this Conspiracy; and it imports that if Evi∣dence should not be true and clear, he would acquit him. And so he is, as he should be, indifferent. But if a Man, qualified for a Juror, affirm Positively that such a Prisoner is guilty, and that he will find him so whatever Evidence or Proof be given or made to the contrary, I think that may be a Misdemea∣nour punishable as an owning and encouraging of Falshood, Perjury and In∣justice, and a contempt and scandal to the Justice of the Kingdom. Tho I hope and believe that no man hath so demeaned himself.

Mr. J. Powell.

In a Civil Case it would be a good Cause of Challenge. If a Man have given his Opinion about the right one way or other, may you not upon a Voire dire ask him whether he hath given his Opinion one way or other? I believe it may be ask in a Civil Cause because he may have been a Refferree; but if you make it criminal it cannot be askt, because a Man is not bound to accuse himself; now the Difference lies in the nature of the Cause, it is not Criminal in a Civil Case for a Man to say he was an Arbi∣trator in such a Case, and, upon what appeared before him, he was of such an Opinion.

Mr. Att. Gen.

But, my Lord, it is a different Case to give an opinion a∣bout the Right between Party and Party where a Man has been an Arbitra∣tor and so in the Nature of a Judge, and where a Man is to go upon a Jury in the Case of Life and Death, and before the Evidence given he declares his Opinion without hearing the Cause.

Sir B. Shower.

My Lord, we know several of the Tryals have been printed, and the Names of several Persons mentioned, and upon reading of the Try∣als or conversing about them, Men are apt to give their Opinions one way or other.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

It is only an Objection in case he has done it.

Mr. J. Rookeby.

But, Brother, how can you ask him the Question?

Mr. Serj. Darnal.

If the Court are of opinion that it is such a Crime that it cannot be askt, as tending to make a Man accuse himself of an infamous Crime, then we submit it to you, and I confess we must not ask it; but we cannot apprehend that there is either Crime or Infamy in it, tho we think it is an Objection and a good Cause of Challenge.

Mr. B. Powys.

I think, tho it be not such a Crime as infamous upon which a Man is not to be credited, for that is Infamy in the Eye of the Law, where∣by a Man is prejudiced in his Credit; yet however it is a shameful thing for a Man to give his Judgment before he hath heard the Evidence and there∣fore I think you ought not to ask him it, to make him accuse himself, if it be an opprobrious matter upon him.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Truly, my Lord, I always took it to be the Rule, if the the thing asked to the Person returned be not criminal nor infamous, the Party that is askt ought to answer to it.

L. C. J. Treby.

I would fain know, if you should ask any of the Ju∣ry-men

this Question, whether he be guilty of all the Crimes that are par∣doned by the last Act of Grace, he be bound to answer it?

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Undoubtedly we cannot ask any such Question; no, not to any one of the things therein mentioned.

L. C. J. Treby.

But yet you will force him to discover a Crime (if it be one) that is unpardoned.

Mr. J. Powell.

Certainly you go too far, Brother, for no Man is obliged to charge himself with what is Criminal, but whether this be Criminal to say, I believe such a one will be hanged, is of another Consideration.

Mr. J. Rookeby.

But I think it must be proved upon him if any Objection be made.

Sir B. Shower.

My Lord, it will be no easy thing to bring Witnesses to prove this matter, and therefore we would have it from his own Mouth.

Mr. J. Rookeby.

And it is a very hard matter for a Man to be put upon proving every Discourse that he has had about the publick Affairs of the time.

Mr. Recorder.

The Reason of your Exception is, that he has declared his opinion before hand, that the Party would be hanged or would suffer, that's a Reproach and a Reflection upon a Wise man so to do; and if they can prove it upon him let them do it: but whether you should ask him such a Question, Whether he be a Fool or a Knave for the giving an opinion one way or other, that's the Question before us.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

My Lord, we do not offer it to the Court as an Ob∣jection that he is not a Wise man.

Mr. Att. Gen.

But what a Man does utter imprudently may occasion a Pre∣judice against him, and therefore ought to be proved, and not he to prove it himself.

L. C. J. Treby.

Especially being a Freeholder of London, and taking no∣tice of what is done in London; and if he does take notice of the Fact, and does previously give his Opinion of a matter which he may be called upon a Jury to try, this is an Indiscretion and a Reproach to him, and I think a Mis∣demeanour.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

My Lord, I acknowledge it is ill done of him, that is, indiscreetly and not wisely, and we would have Discreet and Wise men upon our Jury.

Mr. Cowper.

My Lord, Mr. Serj. Darnall will make it so little a thing at last that it will amount to no cause of Challenge, if it were even proved against him, which we insist it ought to be, it being their Objection, and the Party not being bound to prove it against himself; but truly we think there is more in it than so, because it is an unjust prejudging of a Man before he is tryed and heard, and if so, it is a thing that he ought not to accuse himself of, and there∣fore we oppose the asking any such Question.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Our Objection is not because it is an Offence to declare a Man's opinion upon a Fact reported, but because it shews he has a settled opi∣nion against the Person of his Guilt, and so he is not so equal a Man to try him.

L. C. J. Treby.

And is that like a Honest man and a Freeholder of London, (who ought to be indifferent) to come with a settled opinion against a Man, when he is to be one of his Jury?

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Well, my Lord, we have been heard, and submit it to the Judgment of the Court.

L. C. J. Treby.

Truly I think it reflects both Dishonesty and Dishonour up∣on him, and therefore these Questions ought not to be askt. The Question is not whether a Man (if ever such a Man there were) that hath so resolved and declared shall be sworn? No; he is not fit to serve upon a Jury. But the Question is, How this shall be discovered, by his own Oath or by o∣ther Proof? I think it ought to be made appear by other Proof, if true. A

Man attainted of Felony, Forgery, False Verdict, or Perjury, ought not to serve on a Jury, yet he shall not be examined concerning the same on a Voire dire. And if there be in Court a Copy of such Judgment carefully exami∣ned and kept by himself, he shall not be forced to Answer whether it be a true Copy; tho his Answer could not subject him to any further Penalty.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

My Lord, I hope no Gentleman of the Jury has done it.

L. C. J. Treby.

I hope no Freeholder of London is so indiscreet or so un∣just. But if any Man in this Pannel have any particular Displeasure to the Prisoner, or be unindifferent, or have declared himself so, I do admonish and desire him to discover so much in general; for, it is not fit, nor for the honour of the King's Justice, that such a Man should serve on the Jury.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

We hope so too. We hope that all that are returned upon the Jury are discreet and impartial Men.

Cl. of Arr.

Well, Sir, what say you to this Gentleman Mr. Walker?

Cook.

I challenge you, Sir.

Cl. of Arr.

Nathanael Long.

Sir B. Shower.

My Lord, we think he may ask if they have a Freehold or no; because the Law requires that Qualification, and the Prisoner not being able to prove the Nagative, it puts the Proof of the Affirmative upon the Person himself.

Mr. Att. Gen.

What does Sir Bartholomew mean? would he have the Jury-men bring their Evidences with them to prove their Free-hold?

L. C. J. Treby.

No sure, Mr. Attorney; but to ask the Question was allowed him the last time, and we will not deny him the same just Favour now.

Cook.

Are you a Free-holder, Sir, in London of the value of 10 l. a year?

Mr. Long.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand-Jury when the Bill was found against me?

Mr. Long.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you, Sir.

Cl. of Arr.

William Carbonell.

Mr. Carbonell.

My Lord, I am no Free-holder.

L. C. J. Treby.

What, does he say he has no Free-hold?

Cl. of Arr.

Yes, my Lord.

L. C. J. Treby.

Then he must be set aside.

Cl. of Arr.

Joshua Foster.

Mr. Foster.

My Lord, I am no freeholder in London neither.

Mr. Att. Gen.

My Lord, we desire they may be sworn whether they have a Free-hold or not.

Cl. of Arr.

Hold Mr. Carbonell and Mr. Foster the Book. (which was done se∣verally.) You shall true answer make to all such Questions as shall be askt you by the Court. So help you God.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Ask him if he hath not a Freehold in London?

Mr. Carbonell.

No, I have not.

Cl. of Arr.

Have you or any body in trust for you a Freehold in London of the Value of 10 l. a year?

Mr. Carbonell.

No, Sir.

Cl. of Ar.

Joshua Foster, have you or any in trust for you any Estate of Free-hold in London of the Value of 10 l. a year?

Mr. Foster.

No, Sir.

Cl. of Arr.

Joseph Billers.

Cook.

I desire they may be called in the order as they are in the Pannel, you have not called John Ewen, who is next.

Cl. of Arr.

I do call them in order: as for Mr. Ewen, one has made Oath that he is sick, and is not able to come hither. What say you to Mr. Bil∣lers? there he stands.

Cook.

Sir, are you a Free-holder of 10 l. a year, within the City of London?

Mr. Billers.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Was you of the Grand-Jury, Sir, when the Bill was found against me?

Mr. Billers.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

John Child.

Cook.

Sir, are you a Free-holder within the City of London?

Mr. Child.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Of 10 l. a year?

Mr. Child.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand-Jury, when the Bill was found against me?

Mr. Child.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Edward Leeds.

Cook.

Sir, are you a Freeholder within the City of London, of 10 l. a year?

Mr. Leeds.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand-Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Leeds.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

L. C. J. Treby.

What Question was that he ask'd him?

Cl. of Arr.

Whether he were one of the Grand-Jury that found the Bill.

L. C. J. Treby.

A very proper Question: for an Indicter ought not to be a Tryer.

Cl. of Arr.

Thomas Clark.

Cook.

Sir, are you a Free-holder within the City of London of 10 l. a year?

Mr. Clark.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand-Jury that found the Bill against me.

Mr. Clark.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Nathan Green.

Cook.

Are you a Free-holder, Sir, within the City of London, of the value of 10 l. a year.

Mr. Green.

Yes, Sir.

Cook

Were you of the GrandJury that found the Bill against me.

Mr. Green.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Henry Sherbroke.

Cook

I have nothing to say against him.

Cl. of Arr.

Then hold Mr. Sherbroke the Book.

(which was done.)

Look upon the Prisoner. You shall well and truly try, and true Deliverance make between our Sovereign Lord the King and the Prisoner at the Bar (whom you shall have in charge) according to your Evidence. So help you God.

(Then Mr. Sherbrooke was put into the Place appointed for the Jury.)

Cl. of Arr.

Henry Dry.

Cook.

Sir, are you a Free-holder in the City of London, of the value of 10 l. a year.

Mr. Dry.

Yes, Sir.

Cook

Were you of the Grand-Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Dry.

No, Sir.

Cook.

Sir, I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Joseph Morewood.

Cook.

Sir, have you a Free-hold in London, of the value of 10 l. a year?

Mr. Morewood.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand-Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Morewood.

No, Sir.

Cook.

Sir, I challenge you.

Cl. of Ar.

Richard Greenway.

Cook.

Are you a Free-holder of 10 l. a year in London.

Mr. Greenw.

Yes Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand-Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Greenway.

No, Sir.

Cook.

Sir, I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

John Sherbrook.

Cook.

Sir, are you a Free-holder in the City of London of 10 l. a year?

Mr. Sherbrook.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand-Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Sherbrok.

No, Sir.

Cook.

Sir, I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Thomas Emmes.

Cook.

Are you a Free-holder, Sir, within the City of London of 10 l. a year?

Mr. Emmes.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand-Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Emmes.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Samuel Jackson.

Cook.

Sir, are you a Free-holder within the City of London of 10 l. a year?

Mr. Jackson.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand-Jury that found the Bill against me.

Mr. Jackson.

No, Sir.

Cook.

Sir, I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Henry Hunter.

Cook.

Are you a Free-holder, Sir, in London of the value of 10 l. a year?

Mr. Hunter.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Hunter.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I Challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

John Deacle.

Cook.

Sir, are you a Freeholder within the City of London, of the Value of Ten pounds a year?

Mr. Deacle.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Deacle.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr

John Cullum.

Cook.

I accept of him.

(He was sworn.)

Cl. of Arr.

Thomas Shaw.

Cook.

I accept of him.

(He was sworn.)

Cl. of Arr.

George Juyce.

Cook.

Sir, are you a Freeholder within the City of London of Ten pound a year?

Mr. Juyce.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Juyce,

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Richard Young.

Cook.

I have nothing to say against him.

(He was sworn.)

Cl. of Arr.

John Hedges.

Cook.

Sir, are you a Freeholder within the City of London, of Ten pound a year?

Mr. Hedges.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Hedges.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

John James.

Cook.

Sir, are you a Freeholder within the City of London of Ten pound a year?

Mr. James,

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. James,

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Thomas Poole.

Cook.

Sir are you a Freeholder within the City of London of Ten pound a year?

Mr. Poole,

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Poole.

No Sir?

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Peter Parker.

Cook.

Sir are you a Freeholder in the City of London of Ten pound a year?

Mr. Parker.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Parker.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

William Wilkinson.

Mr. Wilkinson.

My Lord, I am no Freeholder in London.

(To which he was sworn.)

Cl. of Arr.

Henry Mitchell.

Cook.

Hold, Sir, here Thomas Man in my Pannel is next.

Cl. of Arr.

There is Oath made that he is sick in Bad. What say you to Mr. Mitchell?

Cook.

Sir, have you a Freehold of 10 l. a year in the City of London?

Mr. Mitchell.

No, Sir.

(To which he was sworn.)

Cl. of Arr.

Richard Ryder.

Cook.

Sir, Have you a Freehold of Ten pound a year in the City of London?

Mr. Ryder,

Yes, I have, Sir; but I live in a Parish that never serve upon any Juries, nor ever did in the memory of any Man.

Cl. of Arr.

But have you a Freehold of 10 l. a year?

Mr. Ryder.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Ryder.

No, Sir.

Cook.

Sir, I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Richard Temple.

Mr. Temple.

My Lord, I am no Freeholder.

(To which he was sworn.)

Cl. of Arr.

Peter Walker.

Cook.

Sir, are you a Freeholder of the City of London, of Ten pound a year?

Mr. Walker,

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Walker.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Thomas Pistol.

Mr. Pistol.

I am no Freeholder.

(To which he was sworn.)

Cl. of Arr.

John Hunt.

Mr. Hunt.

My Lord, my Name is mistaken; my Name is William Hunt.

L. C. J. Treby.

Then you must go on to another.

Cl. of Arr.

John Hardret.

Mr. Hardret.

I am no Freeholder of 10 l. a year.

(To which he was sworn.)

Cl. of Arr.

John Hammond.

Cook.

Are you a Freeholder, Sir, of 10 l. a year, in London?

Mr. Hammond.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Hammond.

No Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

John Cooper.

Cook.

I accept of him.

(He was Sworn.)

Cl. of Arr.

Josselin Roberts.

Cook.

Sir, are you a Freeholder within the City of London of Ten pound a year?

Mr. Roberts.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Roberts.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Jonathan Micklethwait.

Cook.

I have nothing to say against him.

(He was sworn.)

Cl. of Arr.

Richard Chiswell.

Cook.

Sir, are you a Freeholder within the City of London of Ten pound a year?

Mr. Chiswel.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Chiswell,

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Joseph Thompson.

Cook.

Sir, are you a Freeholder of the City of London, of Ten pound a year?

Mr. Thompson.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Thompson.

I was Returned upon the Grand Jury, but did not serve.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Edward Brewster.

Cook.

Sir, Are you a Freeholder of the City of London, of Ten pound a year?

Mr. Brewster.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Brewster.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

George Gooday.

Mr. Gooday.

My Lord, I am no Freeholder.

(To which he was sworn.)

Cl. of Arr.

Abraham Hickman.

Cook.

Sir, Are you a Freeholder of the City of London, of Ten pound a Year?

Mr. Hickman.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me.

Mr. Hickman.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr

George Grove.

Cook.

Sir, Are you a Freeholder of the City of London, of Ten pound a Year?

Mr. Grove.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Grove.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Nathaniel Wyersden.

Cook.

Sir, Are you a Freeholder of the City of London, of Ten pound a Year?

Mr. Wyersden.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Wyersden.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you. My Lord, I desire to know how many I have ex∣cepted against.

Cl. of Arr.

One and thirty.

Mr. Burleigh.

Write, write.

Cl. of Arr.

Samuel Blewitt.

Cook.

Sir, Are you a Freeholder of the City of London, of Ten pound a Year?

Mr. Blewitt.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Blewitt.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl of Arr.

John Wolfe.

Cook.

I accept of him.

(He was sworn.)

Cl. of Arr.

William Smith.

Cook.

Sir, Are you a Freeholder of the City of London, of Ten pound a Year?

Mr. Smith.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Smith.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

John Bickly.

Mr. Bickly.

My Lord, I don't look upon my self as a Freeholder?

L. C. J. Treby.

Why so, Sir.

Mr. Bickly.

I have a Lease for One and fifty Years, my Lord, of my House, and there is a very little piece of Ground adjoining to it that was very conve∣nient for me to lay to my Lease; there is no way to it but through my House; it is a thing that never was let for any thing, and it is not worth the Building.

L. C. J. Treby.

What Estate have you in it? Do you pay a Ground-Rent for it?

Mr. Bickly.

My Lord, I bought that little piece of Ground for the Con∣veniency of my Lease.

L. C. J. Treby.

But did you purchase it for Term of Years, or to you and your Heirs?

Mr. Bickly.

Nay, I bought it for ever, my Lord.

L. C. J. Treby.

Then you have a Freehold in it. What's the Value of it?

Mr. Bickly.

Truly very little, my Lord.

L. C. J. Treby.

I don't know any Body can judge of the Value of it but your self. Is it worth Ten Pound a Year?

Mr. Bickly.

My Lord, I can't Value it at Ten Pound a Year, it never cost me Forty Pound.

L. C. J. Treby.

Then for Estate you are well enough, but for Value you are a little under.

Cl. of Arr.

Thomas Collins.

Cook.

I accept of him.

(He was sworn.)

Cl. of Arr.

John Watson.

(He was sworn.)

Cook.

I do not Challenge him.

Cl. of Arr.

Benjamin Hooper.

Cook.

I accept of him.

(He was sworn.)

Cl. of Arr.

John Wells.

Cook.

Sir, Are you a Freeholder of the City of London, of Ten pound a year?

Mr. Wells.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Wells.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

John Hibbart.

Cook.

Sir, Are you a Freeholder of the City of London, of Ten pound a year?

Mr. Hibbart.

Yes, Sir.

Cook.

Were you of the Grand Jury that found the Bill against me?

Mr. Hibbart.

No, Sir.

Cook.

I challenge you.

Cl. of Arr.

Mr. Cook you have challenged your full Number. Call Daniel Wray.

(He was sworn.)

Cl. of Arr.

John Pettit.

(He was sworn.)

Cryer

Countez.

Henry Sherbrook.

Cryer.

One, &c.

Cl. of Arr.

John Pettit.

Cryer.

Twelve good Men and true, stand together and hear your Evi∣dence.

The Names of the Twelve sworn are as follow:

• Henry Sherbrook,
• John Cullum,
• Thomas Shaw,
• Richard Young,
• John Cooper.
• Jonathan Micklethwait,
• John Wolfe,
• Thomas Collins,
• John Watson,
• Benjamin Hooper,
• Daniel Wray, and
• John Pettit.

Cl. of Arr.

Cryer, Make Proclamation.

Cryer.

O Yez, If any one can inform my Lord, the King's Justices, the King's Serjeant, the King's Attorney-General, or this Inquest now to be taken of the High Treason whereof Peter Cook the Prisoner at the Bar stands Indicted, let them come forth and they shall be heard, for the now Prisoner stands at the Bar upon his Deliverance; and all others that are bound by Recognizance to give Evidence against the Prisoner at the Bar, let them come forth, and give their Evidence, or they forfeit their Recognizance.

L. C. J. Treby.

You must make room for those Twelve Gentlemen that are sworn, that they may be at ease; and for those that are not sworn, their Attendance may be spared.

Cl. of Arr.

Peter Cook, hold up thy Hand.

(Which he did.)

Gentle∣men, you that are sworn, look upon the Prisoner, and hearken to his Cause. He stands Indicted in London, by the Name of Peter Cook, late of London, Gentleman; For that whereas an Open and Notoriously Pub∣lick and most Sharp and Cruel War, for a great while hath been, and yet is by Land and by Sea, Carried on, and Prosecuted, by Lewis the French King, against the Most Serene, Most Illustrious and Most Excel∣lent Prince, our Sovereign Lord William the Third, by the Grace of God, of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, &c. All which time, the said Lewis the French King, and his Subjects, were and yet are Foes and Enemies of our said Lord the King that now is, William the Third, and his Subjects, He the said Peter Cook, a Subject of the said Lord the King that now is, of this his Kingdom of England, well knowing the Premises, not having the Fear of God in his Heart, nor weighing the Duty of his Allegiance, but being moved and seduced by the Instigation of the Devil, as a false Traytor against the said Most Se∣rene, Most Mild and Most Excellent Prince, our Sovereign Lord William the Third, now King of England, his Supreme, True, Rightful, Law∣ful, and Undoubted Lord, the Cordial Love, and True and Due Obedi∣ence, Fidelity, and Allegiance, which every Subject of the said Lord the King that now is, towards him our said Lord the King, should bear, and of Right is bound to bear, withdrawing, and utterly to Extinguish, In∣tending and Contriving, and with all his Strength Purposing and De∣signing the Government of this Kingdom of England, under Him our said Lord the King that now is of Right Duly, Happily, and very Well Establish'd, altogether to Subvert, Change and Alter, and His Faithful Subjects, and the Freemen of this Kingdom of England, into Intolerable and Miserable Servitude to the aforesaid French King to Subdue and In∣thral;

the First Day of July, in the Seventh Year of the Reign of our said Lord the King that now is, and divers Days and Times, as well before as after, at London, in the Parish of St. Peter Cornhil, in the Ward of Limestreet, Falsly, Maliciously, Devilishly, and Trayterously did Com∣pass, Imagine and Contrive, Purpose and Intend, our said Sovereign Lord the King that now is, then his Supreme, True, Rightful and Lawful Lord, of and from the Regal State, Title, Honour, Power, Crown, Empire, and Government of this Kingdom of England, to Depose, Cast down, and Utterly Deprive, and the same our Lord the King to Death and Final Destruction to bring, and the aforesaid Lewis the French King, by Armies, Soldiers, Legions and his Subjects, this Kingdom of Eng∣land to Invade, Fight with, Conquer and Subdue, to Move, Incite, Pro∣cure and Assist, and a Miserable Slaughter among the Faithful Subjects of our said Lord King William, throughout this whole Kingdom of Eng∣land, to Make and Cause. And further, That the said Peter Cook, du∣ring the War aforesaid, to wit, the aforesaid First Day of July, in the Seventh Year abovesaid, and divers other Days and Times before and after, at London aforesaid, in the Parish and Ward aforesaid, to the said Foes and Enemies of the same our Lord the King, did Adhere, and was Assisting: And his aforesaid most Wicked and Devilish Treasons, and Trayterous Compassings, Contrivances, Intentions, and Purposes afore∣said, to Fulfil, Perfect, and bring to Effect, and in Prosecution, Perform∣ance, and Execution of that Trayterous Adhering, He the said Peter Cook, as such a False Traytor, during the War aforesaid, to wit, the same First Day of July, in the Year abovesaid, at London aforesaid, in the Pa∣rish and Ward aforesaid, and divers other Days and Times, as well be∣fore as after, there, and elsewhere in London aforesaid, Falsly, Mali∣ciously, Advisedly, Secretly, and Trayterously, and by Force and Arms, with one Robert Chernock, Sir John Friend and Sir William Parkyns, Knights, (which said Robert Chernock, Sir John Friend, and Sir William Parkyns, were lately severally Duly Convicted and Attainted of High Treason, in Contriving and Conspiring the Death of our said Lord the King that now is) and with divers other False Traytors to the Jurors unknown, did Meet, Propose, Treat, Consult, Consent, and Agree to Procure from the aforesaid Lewis the French King, of his Subjects, For∣ces and Soldiers, then and yet Foes and Enemies of our said Sovereign Lord William, now King of England, &c. great Numbers of Soldiers and Armed Men, this Kingdom of England to Invade and Fight with, and to Levy, Procure, and Prepare great Numbers of Armed Men, and Troops, and Legions against our said Lord the King that now is, to Rise up and be Formed, and with those Foes and Enemies, at and upon such their Invasion and Entry within this Kingdom of England, to Join and Unite, Rebellion and War against our said Lord the King that now is, within this Kingdom of England, to Make, Levy, and Carry on the same: our Lord the King so, as aforesaid, to Depose, and Him to Kill and Murther: And further with the said False Traytors, the same First Day of July, in the Year abovesaid, at London aforesaid, in the Parish and Ward aforesaid, Tray∣terously did Consult, Consent, and Agree to send the aforesaid Robert Chernock as a Messenger from him the said Peter Cock, and the same other Traytors, as far as, and into, the Kingdom of France, in Parts beyond the Seas, unto James, the Second, late King of England, to Propose to him, and to Request him to obtain from the aforesaid French King the afore∣said Soldiers and Armed Men for the Invasion aforesaid to be made, and Intelligence and Notice of such their Trayterous Intentions and Adhe∣rings, to the said late King James the Second, and the said other Foes and

Enemies, and their Adherents, to give and shew, and them to inform of other Things, Particulars, and Circumstances thereunto Referring, for the Assistance, Animating, Comforting, and Aid of the said Foes and Enemies of the said Lord the King that now is, in the War aforesaid: And to Stir up and Procure those Foes and Enemies the readilier, and more boldly, this Kingdom of England to Invade, the Treasons, and Trayterous Contrivances, Compassings, Imaginings, and Purposes of the said Peter Cook aforesaid, to Perfect and Fulfil; also the same First day of July, in the Seventh Year abovesaid, at London aforesaid, in the Parish and Ward aforesaid, He, the said Peter Cook, divers Horses, and very many Arms, Guns, Muskets, Pistols, Rapiers, and Swords, and other Weapons, Ammunition, and Warlike Matters, and Military In∣struments, Falsly, Maliciously, Secretly, and Trayterously, did Obtain, Buy, Gather together, and Procure; and to be Bought, Gathered toge∣ther, Obtained, and Procured, did Cause, and in his Custody had, and detained to that Intent, To use the same in the said Invasion, War, and Rebellion against our said Lord the King that now is, Him, our said Lord the King, of and from the Regal State, Crown, and Government of this Kingdom of England, to Depose, Cast down, and Deprive, and Him to Kill and Murther; and the Designs, Intentions, and all the Purposes of him the said Peter Cook aforesaid, to Fulfil, Perfect, and fully to bring to Effect, against the Duty of his Allegiance, and against the Peace of our said Sovereign Lord that now is, his Crown and Dignity, as also against the Form of the Statute in such Case made and provi∣ded.

Upon this Indictment he has been Arraigned, and thereunto has plead∣ed Not Guilty, and for his Tryal hath put himself upon God and his Country, which Country you are, your Charge is to inquire whether he be guilty of the High-Treason whereof he stands Indicted, or not guilty; if you find him guilty, you are to inquire what Goods or Chat∣tels, Lands or Tenements, he had at the time of the High-Treason com∣mitted, or at any time since; if you find him not guilty, you are to in∣quire whether he fled for it; if you find that he fled for it, you are to in∣quire of his Goods and Chattels as if you had sound him Guilty; if you find him not Guilty, nor that he did fly for it, you are to say so, and no more, and hear your Evidence.

Mr. Mompesson.

May it please your Lordship, and you Gentlemen that are sworn, this is an Indictment for High Treason against Peter Cook, the Prisoner at the Bar, and the Indictment sets forth, That whereas there has been an open and cruel War for a long time, and still is be∣tween his Majesty King William, and the French King, the Prisoner at the Bar not weighing the Duty of his Allegiance, the First of July in the Seventh year of the King's Reign, Did Compass and Intend to De∣pose and Deprive the King of the Title, Honour, and Dignity of the Imperial Crown of this Realm, and likewise to put the King to Death, and did adhere to the King's Enemies; and to fulfil these Treasons, he did Consult with Chernock, and several other Traytors who were menti∣oned, there, and some of whom have been found Guilty of Treason, and executed for it, to send over to the late King James, to perswade the French King to send over Soldiers and Arms to invade this Kingdom, and to raise an Insurrection and Rebellion in it, and to Deprive and put the King to Death, and to compleat these Treasons, it further sets forth, That the Prisoner at the Bar did provide several Arms and Horses, and this is

laid to be against the Duty of his Allegiance, against the King's Peace, Crown and Dignity, and against the Form of the Statute in that Case made and provided; to this he had pleaded Not Guilty, and for Tryal put himself upon the Country, and, Gentlemen, if we prove these Facts laid in the indictment, its your Duty to find him Guilty.

Mr. Att. Gen.

May it please your Lordship, and you, Gentlemen of the Jury, the Prisoner at the Bar stands Indicted for High Treason.

Cook.

My Lord Chief-Justice, if your Lordship pleases, before the Witnesses are Examined against me. I intreat you that they may not be both in Court together, that one may not hear what the other swears, tho' I suppose it is the same thing; for they have been together both now and the last day.

L. C. J. Treby.

Mr. Cook, I must tell you it is not necessary to be grant∣ed for asking; for we are not to discourage, or cast any Suspicion upon, the Witnesses, when there is nothing made out against them; but it is a Favour that the Court may grant, and does grant sometimes, and now does it to you; tho' it be not of necessity: they shall be examined apart, but at present this is not the time of Examination; for the King's Coun∣sel are now to open the Evidence before they examine the Witnesses; but when the time comes for the Witnesses to be called and examined, the Court will, in favour to you, take care that your Request be com∣plied with.

Mr. Att. Gen.

May it please your Lordship, the Prisoner stands Indict∣ed for High Treason, in Compassing and Imagining the Death and De∣struction of his Majesty, and likewise in adhering to his Majesty's Ene∣mies, these are the Treasons specified in the Indictment: the Overt Acts that are laid to prove these Treasons are, That he with several other Trai∣tors, named in the Indictment, did Meet and Consult, and agree to send over Chernock into France, to invite the French King to make an Invasion upon the Kingdom, and did provide Arms for that purpose.

Gentlemen, the nature of the Evidence that you will have produced to prove the Prisoner Guilty of these Treasons lies thus: It will appear to you that there has been for some time a Conspiracy carried on by seve∣ral Traytors, and Wicked Persons, to subvert the established Govern∣ment of this Kingdom, and destroy the Constitution of England, by a Foreign Invasion of the French. You will hear that this Conspiracy was laid wide, and consisted of several parts, one part was that of Assassina∣ting his Majesty's Royal Person, and that was to be done first, as a Pre∣paration and Encouragement to the French to invade the Kingdom: the other part was the inviting the French King to invade us, and the Pri∣soner at the Bar is accused of being concerned in that part that relates to the Invasion of this Kingdom, by a French Power; and tho' it may be the other part, that of Assassinating the King, be the Blackest part of the Conspiracy, yet if the Prisoner at the Bar has been ingaged in the inviting a Foreign Power to invade the Kingdom, my Lords, the Judges, will tell you, in Point of Law, that is as much an Overt Act of the Compassing the Destruction of the King and People of England, and the Subversion of our ancient good Constitution, as if he had been con∣cerned immediately in the other part, the Assassination.

But now, Gentlemen, that the Prisoner was ingaged in Inviting the French to Invade us, you will hear proved by several Witnesses, that there having been a Design last Year, just before his Majesty went to Flanders, to expose his own Person for our Protection, and the Protection of the Liberties of Eu∣rope, there was a Conspiracy to Murder him before he went to Flanders, which, it seems, they were not ripe for then; but immediately after he was gone to Flanders, you will hear there were formal Meetings of several Gentlemen and Persons of Quality, among whom the Prisoner at the Barr was one: There was a Meeting in May, last Year, after the King was gone to Flanders; and this was at the Old King's Head in Leaden-Hall-street; and there were present, my Lord of Aylesbury, my Lord Montgomery, Sir William Parkyns, Sir John Freind, Mr. Chernock, (all which Three last have suffered the Punishment of-the Law for their Treason already;) and there were also Mr. Cook, the Priso¦ner at the Barr, Mr. Porter and Mr. Goodman; these Men did meet together' to consider of the best Ways and Means of Encouraging and Inviting the French King with an Armed Force to Invade this Kingdom; They considered that That was a proper Opportunity, and did treat of several Arguments that might perswade to it: First, that the King was gone to Flanders, and so was not in Person here to Defend us; and that the Troops, to make good such De∣fence, were in a great measure drawn thither, to assist the Allies against the French Power; They did think likewise, that at that time there was a great Discontent and Dissatisfaction in the Nation, though I think in that they were greatly mistaken; and I believe and hope they will always find themselves so, to think that the People of England are so little sensible of that which is the means of their Preservation, as to hearken to any Discontents to Incourage a French Power to come into England to destroy our Religion and Liberties; that indeed they did apprehend, though they were mistaken, and I believe they always will, when they go upon that ground.

Gentlemen, These Persons thinking this a proper Opportunity, did agree to send a Messenger into France upon this Message, To go to the late King James, and perswade him to desire and prevail with the French King to assist him with Ten thousand Men, 8000 Foot, 1000 Horse, and 1000 Dragoons; and to in∣courage him, they promised their Assistance here, as soon as he came over; and undertook, that between them, they could furnish, and wou'd raise 2000 Horse to meet him at his Landing, and joyn upon such an Invasion.

Gentlemen, At this Meeting this was agreed upon by all that were there, whereof the Prisoner was one; and they did agree to send Mr. Chernock, (who has since been executed, and a principal Incourager of the Design, and Actor in it;) he was the Messenger that was appointed to go upon this Errand, and Mr. Chernock was resolved to go, but desired another Meeting of these Gentle∣men, to know if they continued in their former Resolution, that he might have all the Assurance that was Reasonable to give the French King Incourage∣ment to make the Invasion: Accordingly another Meeting was had of most of the same persons that were at the Meeting before; particularly the Prisoner at the Barr was at that second Meeting, which was in Covent-Garden at one Mrs. Mountjoy's, who keeps a Tavern next door to Sir John Fenwick's Lodg∣ings; there they met upon the same Design, and upon Consultation had, and the Question ask'd, they did agree to continue in the former Resolution, and upon that immediately Mr. Chernock went into France to sollicit Forces from thence to Invade us; but it happ'ned, as it seems, that the French King's For∣ces were otherwise imployed, so that he cou'd not spare so many at that time; and this Return was brought by Chernock to the Gentlemen that im∣ployed him; That he had spoke with the late King, who gave him that An∣swer,

That the French King cou'd not spare so many Men at that time, but he thank'd them for their Kindness.

Gentlemen, This will be the nature of Our Evidence, to show, that the Pri∣soner at the Barr was concerned in that part of the Conspiracy which relates to the French Invasion; and if he be guilty of that, in point of Law, he is as much guilty of the Conspiracy, to Depose and Murder the King, as if he had been concerned in the other part of Assassinating his Royal Person; and I be∣lieve no body can think that those that were to act in the Assassination, wou'd have attempted to ingage in such a desperate Design, if it had not been for the Incouragement of the French Invasion that was to second them afterwards, if they succeeded; so that no body can extenuate the Crime of the Invasion, because as to the Horridness of the Attempt, it is less Black than the other; they are both Crimes of a very high nature, and equally High-Treason; and if we prove the Prisoner Guilty of this part, we hope you will find him Guilty.

Mr. Soll. Gen.

My Lord, we will call our Witnesses and prove the Matter, as it has been opened. Call Captain Porter and Mr. Goodman.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Now, my Lord, we must desire that That may be done which our Client desired before, and which your Lordship was favourably pleased to promise, that the Witnesses may be examined a-part.

L. C. J. Treby.

Let it be so: Who do you begin with?

Mr. Soll. Gen.

We begin with Captain Porter, my Lord.

L. C. J Treby.

Then let Mr. Goodman withdraw.

Mr. Baker.

Let Mr. Goodman go up Stairs, and we will call him pre∣sently.

Mr. Soll. Gen.

Swear Captain Porter: (which was done.) Captain Porter, Do you know Mr. Cook, the Prisoner at the Barr?

Capt. Porter.

Yes, my Lord.

Mr. Soll. Gen.

Do you remember a Meeting of some Gentlemen at the King's-Head Tavern in Leaden Hall-street?

Capt. Porter.

Yes, I do, Sir.

Mr. Soll. Gen.

Then pray give an Account of the Company that were there, the Time when, and what passd.

Capt. Porter.

My Lord, the last Year we had two Meetings; the First was in May, the other was the latter end of May, or the beginning of June; the First was at the Kings-Head in Leaden-Hall-street; there were my Lord of Aylesbury, my Lord Montgomery, Sir John Fenwick, Sir John Freind, Sir Wil∣liam Parkyns, Mr. Chernock, Mr. Cook and my self; Mr. Goodman came in af∣ter Dinner; at this Meeting it was Consulted which was the best way and the quickest to Restore King James, and hasten his Return into England; several Discourses and Proposals there were; at last it was agreed to send Mr. Chernock to the late King to borrow of the French King Ten thousand Men, 8000 Foot, 1000 Horse, and 1000 Dragoons, to be sent over into England to assist the King's Restoration. Says Mr. Chernock thereupon, This the King can do with∣out your sending, and I wou'd not go upon a foolish Errand. What will you do to Assist in this Matter? the Company desir'd him to promise King James, That if he wou'd send word when he Landed, and where, they wou'd be sure to meet him at his Landing with a Body of 2000 Horse.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Was the Prisoner at the Barr in the Company, and present at this Resolution?

Capt. Porter.

Yes, he was.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Did all the Company agree to it?

Capt. Porter.

Yes, they did.

Mr. Att. Gen.

What signs were there of their Agreement? did they stand up severally and declare their Agreement, or how?

Capt. Porter.

My Lord of Aylesbury and Sir John Fenwick did rise up, and desired Captain Chernock, that he wou'd go upon this Errand: And when the Question was ask'd severally of all there present by Mr. Chernock, Whether he might assure the King of what they had told him? Every one said Yes, you may; and Mr. Cook kneel'd indeed upon a Chair, and said Yes, you may.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Did he give his Consent to it?

Capt. Porter.

Yes, he answer'd in those very words.

Mr. Soll. Gen.

Do you remember any Meeting of any Company at Mrs. Mountjoy's?

Capt. Porter.

Yes, that was a second Meeting.

Mr. Soll. Gen.

Pray tell my Lord and the Jury, how you came to meet there then, what Company were there, and what pass'd.

Capt. Porter.

Mr. Chernock desir'd another Meeting, to see if the Gentle∣men kept to their former Resolution; and we met at Mrs. Mountjoy's eight or ten Days after, and there were most of the Company that was at the first Meet∣ing, and there all that were present did assure Mr. Chernock that they kept to their first Resolution, and wou'd abide to what was agreed upon at the former Meeting.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Who were present at the second Meeting?

Capt. Porter.

The Prisoner at the Barr was there at that second Meeting.

Mr. Att. Gen.

What was that second Meeting for, do you say?

Capt. Porter.

It was to give Mr. Chernock assurance, that we were agreed to stand by the Resolution taken at the first Meeting.

Mr. Att. Gen.

What did Mr. Chernock do afterwards?

Capt. Porter.

I went away from them; there was Sir William Parkyns, Sir John Freind and Captain Chernock went to the Queens-Head Tavern in Fleet∣street, and Captain Chernock told me he wou'd go in two or three Days, and I believe did so.

Mr. Att. Gen.

When did you see him afterwards?

Capt. Porter.

When I was a Prisoner upon the account of the Riot in Drury∣lane; about two or three Days after I came to Newgate he came to see me, and said he had been in France; and that King James thank'd us for our kind Of∣fer, but the French King cou'd not spare so many Men that Year; and he told me he had been with my Lord of Aylesbury, and the rest of the Gentlemen that had imploy'd him to go over, and had delivered them the several Messa∣ges that he was ordered to do from the King.

L. C. J. Treby.

Captain Porter, who were present at that second Meeting, do you say?

Capt. Porter.

My Lord of Aylesbury, Sir John Freind, Sir William Parkyns, Captain Chernock, Mr. Cook and my self; I cannot tell whether my Lord Mont∣gomery or Mr. Goodman were at that second Meeting or no.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Captain Porter, I wou'd ask you another Question: You were concerned in the Assassination with those other Persons that Ingaged in it; Pray what Safety did you propose to your selves after the Assassination was over?

Capt. Porter.

My Lord, I ask'd Sir George Barclay what we shou'd do after the Fact was committed: Says he, You need fear nothing, I will go away that night, I have a Ship ready, and the King will be Landed in five or six Days afterwards; if you'll but keep selves close for so many days, all will do well.

Mr. Soll. Gen.

If the Prisoner or the Counsel will ask him any Questions, my Lord, they may do it.

Sir B. Shower.

Pray Sir, can you recollect what time a day this was that this Debate and Resolution were had at the Old King's-Head in Leaden-Hall∣street?

Capt. Porter.

Truly Sir Bartholomew, I can't tell.

Sir B. Shower.

Pray, by what means do you recollect that this was in the Month of May?

Capt. Porter.

Because Captain Chernock was absent at the Dog-Tavern Riot, which was the Tenth of June.

Sir B. Shower.

Was it not in April?

Capt. Porter.

No, Sir; to the best of my Remembrance it was in May.

Sir B. Shower.

What makes you think it was in May rather than April?

Capt. Porter.

I have told you Sir, because both Meetings were before the Dog-Tavern Riot, the Tenth of June, and Mr. Chernock was not there at that time; but he told me afterwards he had been in France, and there were eight or ten Days difference between the two Meetings.

Mr. Att. Gen.

My Lord, if they have done with him, I wou'd ask him one Question, to settle this Matter in point of Time. Capt. Porter, Was the King gone to Flanders when you had these Meetings?

Capt. Porter.

The King was gone, Sir, before the first Meeting.

Mr. Att. Gen.

The King did not go till several days in May; was Mr. Good∣man there?

Capt. Porter.

He was at the first Meeting, but I can't tell whether he was at the second or no.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Pray what time was Mr. Goodman there at the first Meet∣ing?

Capt. Porter.

He came up after Dinner at the first Meeting.

Mr. Baker.

Then call down Mr. Goodman, who came in, and was sworn.

Mr. Soll. Gen.

Mr. Goodman, Pray will you give my Lord and the Jury an Account what you know of an intended Invasion upon this Kingdom; what were the Circumstances of it, and who were concerned in it.

Mr. Goodman.

My Lord, About the middle of May last, or thereabouts, Captain Porter sent to me, and told me there was a Meeting of some Gentle∣men of our acquaintance at the King's-Head in Leaden-Hall-street; and he de∣sired me that I wou'd be there, because it was about business: I told him I did not know whether I cou'd be there at Dinner; but however, I wou'd not fail of coming thither after Dinner; and accordingly I came. When I came into the House, I sent up my Name to Captain Porter, and he came down and brought me up stairs, and there I saw my Lord, Montgomery, my Lord of Aylesbury, Sir John Fenwick, Sir William Parkyns, Sir John Freind, Mr. Chernock, and that Gentleman at the Barr, Mr. Cook: When we were there, the Discourse was, That we did think King James's coming was Retarded, and we wou'd do any thing to facilitate his Restoration.

Cook.

My Lord Chief Justice.

L. C. J. Treby.

What say you, Mr. Cook?

Cook.

My Lord, If your Lordship pleases, I desire the Jury may not be talk'd to by any body; and I understand there are some talking with the Jury.

L. C. J. Treby.

Fye upon it, we will lay any body by the Heels that do so, they must neither be Disturbed, nor Instructed by any body.

Cook.

My Lord, I am inform'd there was some-body talking to them, and telling them this was the same Case with Sir John Freind.

L. C. J. Treby.

Do you but show us the Man, and we will find another place for him; we will send him to the Goal, I'll assure you.

Mr. Burleigh.

This Gentleman, my Lord, did hear such a Dis∣course to the Jury (pointing to a Gentleman there) who stood up.

My Lord, I cannot positively swear to the Man, but I did hear some Discourse that it was the same Evidence as in the former Tryal.

L. C. J. Treby.

If you can show us who it was, we will take care to punish him: I suppose he stands Corrected; and if we knew who he was, he shou'd stand Committed.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Pray, Mr. Goodman, begin again, and tell what pass'd at that Meeting, because the Jury were interrupted from hearing by Peo∣ple's buzzing about them.

Mr. Goodman.

My Lord, When Captain Porter brought me up into the Room, I told you what Gentlemen I found there; after we were set down, there was a Consultation, that considering the French King's Wars Retarded the Affair of sending back King James, and the means of Re∣storing him to the Crown, it was fit we shou'd find out some way or me∣thod to facilitate his Restoration, and it was thought convenient to have a Messenger to send over to King James with Proposals for that purpose; to this effect, as near as I remember, That if King James cou'd prevail with the French King to furnish Ten thousand Men, whereof 8000 to be Foot, 1000 Horse, and 1000 Dragoons, we wou'd endeavour to meet him at the Head of as many Horse as we cou'd raise, to sustain those Forces at their Landing: This was Debated, in order to come to a Reso∣lution; and much Difficulty there was how many the Number should be; the Man pitch'd upon to be sent, was Mr. Chernock; and after some De∣bate, how many Thousand Horse could be raised: Says Mr. Chernock, Don't let me go over upon a foolish Errand, but let me know what I have to say exactly: Thereupon it was concluded by all, that Two thou∣sand Horse should be the Number we cou'd promise, and the King might depend upon them; and if we brought more, so much the better; and Sir John Freind said, I believe he has so many Friends here, that if he came himself, he might be welcome; but that we did not think fit to trust to; and no body wou'd advise any such thing: when the Resolution of the Thing and the Number was thus fix'd, Mr. Chernock ask'd whe∣ther it were with all our Consents? and that he might assure the King, that this was our Resolution thereupon? we all rose up, and said to him, Yes, you may, yes, you may, every one particularly; and I remem∣ber one thing particularly concerning the Prisoner Mr. Cook, That he kneel'd upon the Chair when he said Yes, you may; and his Elbows were upon the Table: This is all that I know of that Meeting. There was to be another Meeting, as Captain Porter told me; but I had business in the City: but whatsoever he promised on my behalf, as to the Quota of Men, I wou'd be sure to make it good; and I was not at the second Meeting.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Did you see Mr. Chernock afterwards?

Mr. Goodman.

Yes, I did, when he came back; and he told me the Things was not accepted, for the French King cou'd not spare Men, and that he had been with the several Gentlemen to carry them the Com∣plements that he had in charge from King James, who returned them Thankes for their good Affection; and among the rest, he did me the Ho∣nour to return me Thanks too.

Sir B. Shower.

Pray, Mr. Goodman, let me ask you a Question: When was it that you saw Mr. Chernock after this?

Mr. Goodman.

It was in Arundel-street, at his Lodgings.

Sir B. Shower.

But I ask you, Sir, when it was? Was it before or after the Tenth of June?

Mr. Goodman.

It was after the Tenth of June, Sir.

Sir B. Shower.

How long after, pray.

Mr. Goodman.

I believe it was a Month after the Tenth of June.

Sir B. Shower.

Did you see him here in England before Mr. Porter was Discharged from the Riot, and came out of Newgate?

Mr. Goodman.

I believe I did see him before Capt. Porter was Dischar∣ged, long.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Who were the Persons that were present at that Meeting?

Mr. Goodman.

My Lord Montgomery, My Lord of Aylesbury, Sir John Fenwick, Sir John Freind, Sir Wiliam Parkyns, Mr. Chernock, Capt. Por∣ter, and the Prisoner at the Barr, Mr. Cook.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Were you at Dinner with them, Sir?

Mr. Goodman.

No, I came in after Dinner.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Pray what House was it, do you say, this Meeting was at?

Mr. Goodman.

It was at the King's-Head in Leaden-Hall-street.

Sir B. Shower.

Can you tell what day of the Week it was?

Mr. Goodman.

No, nor the day of the Month.

Sir B. Shower.

Was you ever in the Company of these Gentlemen at any other time?

Mr. Goodman.

No, this was the only time that I heard of this Consul∣tation; I was not at the second Meeting.

Cook.

If your Lordship pleases, may I ask Mr. Goodman any Questi∣ons?

L. C. J. Treby.

Yes, by all means ask him what you will.

Cook.

Mr. Goodman, You are upon yor Oath: but did you ever hear me speak ten words in your life? was you ever in my Company in any House, before or since?

Mr. Goodman.

Yes, Sir; I was in your Company at the Cock in Bow∣street, where you came in accidentally.

Cook.

Did you ever hear me talk of the Government, or any thing of that nature?

Mr. Goodman.

What the Discourse was of, I cannot particularly say, but I am certain you was there: And as to the Consultation that I now speak of, I remember very well you gave your Consent in that manner as I have told the Court.

Mr. Att. Gen.

My Lord, we have done at the present.

L. C. J. Treby.

Then, Brother Darnall, what say you for the Priso∣ner?

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

May it please your Lordship, and you Gentlemen of the Jury: I am Counsel, in this Case, for the Prisoner at the Bar, Mr. Cook, who stands Indicted of a very great Offence, no less, Gentle∣men, than High-Treason; and if he be Guilty, his Punishment will be as great: But because the Punishment and the Offence are both very great, the Law requires exact positive Proof, and that by two credible Witnesses. There have been two indeed that have been produced to you; and if you believe both of them, after what we shall offer to you against them; and if what they swear be true, the Prisoner is Guilty: But if we satisfie you that either of them is not to be credited, so that you do not believe both of them, he must be acquitted.

There is no doubt, Gentlemen, but that here has been a Villanous Hor∣rid Plot; there is no question of it; and it was, as it has been opened, basely to Assassinate one of the bravest Men living; and to make the hap∣piest People in the World, if they know when they are so, the most mi∣serable People upon Earth, by bringing them under French Tyranny and Slavery. Many of the Traytors have been brought to just Punishment for this Treason; nay, they have own'd the Fact at their Death's, so that there is no question of the Truth of it; And therefore, Gentlemen, every honest Man will endeavour to bring such as are plainly Guilty, of such an abominable Conspiracy, to just Punishment; but yet they will be as carefull not to let an innocent Man suffer; that, Gentlemen, every honest Man will take care of, and especially such as are upon their Oaths: It concerns a Jury highly to be satisfied, that he is not Innocent, whom they bring in Guilty; for 'tis better that twenty guilty Men shou'd escape, than one innocent Man suffer.

But, Gentlemen, if my Brief be true, we shall give you such an Ac∣count of one of these Witnesses; first, as to the Man himself; that he is not a Man to be credited as a Witness; and then besides that, as to the Evidence he gives in this Case; (I say, if my Brief be true) it is false, and we shall prove it so; and when you have heard our Evidence, if you are satisfied that one of these Witnesses is not to be credited, or that what he swears is not true, you are to acquit the Prisoner.

Gentlemen, Here has been one Mr. Goodman produced as a Witness, one that never was produced before at the Tryal of any of those that have suffered, so that the truth of their Guilt does not at all depend upon his Evidence, nor does it give any credit to it. This is this Gentleman's first Entry upon this Stage; and yet (if my Brief be true) this is not the first bloody or cruel Part that he has Acted; for we have a Record of Conviction against him, whereby it will appear to you, that he was In∣dicted (for Endeavouring to Poison two Great Dukes) for giving forty Guinea's to an Italian Emprick, one Amidei, and promising Two hun∣dred Pounds more when it was effected, to Poison the late Duke of Gras∣ton and the present Duke of Northumberland; and we shall shew you, that he was Convicted of it, and Fined a Thousand Pound for the Of∣fence; which, considering the meanness of his Circumstances at that time, was as much as Twenty thousand Pounds; for he could as well

have paid Twenty, as One then; and it appears too, that Mr. Goodman (nay, it will not be denied by him himself) was in this Horrid Plot; and he that wou'd be concern'd to Poison two Dukes in a Family, to which he had so many Obligations—

Mr. Goodman.

My Lord, I desire leave to speak to this Matter that the Serjeant mentions.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Pray, Sir, let me go on; you may talk anon; I have seen the Copy of the Record of Conviction, and have it ready to pro∣duce.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Mr. Goodman, be quiet, and stay till by and by; you will be defended, no doubt, on it; but in the mean time let them go on, and don't interrupt them.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

I say, my Lord, he that wou'd be concern'd in so vile an Act, as a Contrivance to take away the Lives of two great Dukes, (who were, in effect, his young Mastes,) that he shou'd go to Poison them in a Family to which he had been so much obliged; and then, he that wou'd be concerned in so Horrid a Plot as this was, to destroy his Country, and take away the Life of the King; sure it will be no diffi∣cult thing to think that this Man will not stick at the little Prisoner's Life at the Barr, especially when he has so great a temptation to it, as to save his own Life by it.

But perhaps some of you may doubt whether it is to save his own Life or no: But I believe there are none of you would give any credit to him, if you thought so: Therefore, to satisfie you of that Fact, we shall produce you Evidence of his own Opinion of that matter, besides the General known Circumstances he lay under; As, That he was long in Prison before he charged the Prisoner with any thing, and the Prisoner was at Liberty, went every day abroad for a Week after Mr. Chernock's Tryal, and never absconded one Minute, but lived publickly, openly and visibly to all his Friends, and all Strangers: But besides, Gentlemen, that Mr. Goodman knew he must dye, and justly and deservedly for this Hor∣rid Plot and Treason himself; and had no other way left to save his Life, but to come in thus as an Evidence and an Accuser, which we think will shake his Credit with you.

I say, besides all this, (if my Brief be true,) we shall prove that he has said himself, That either he must Hang Peter Cook, or he must be Hang'd himself. Thus, Gentlemen, he swears to save his own Life, by taking a∣way another's.

This, Gentlemen, is as to the Man himself, that he is not to be cre∣dited. But now further, as to the Evidence that he has given; He tells you that he came into the Tavern in Leaden-Hall-street, and that there he found such Company; he owns he came in after Dinner; and that the other Gentleman, Mr. Porter, owns too; he says there were present at this Meeting, my Lord Montgomery, my Lord of Aylesbury, Mr. Cook, and several other Gentlemen; but (if my Brief be true) we shall prove by three Witnesses, that he was not there till they were gone; and that will make an end of all the pretence of his Evidence.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Nay, then we shall never have done.

Mr. Serj. Darn.

I'll assure you, Sir, I have the Names of Three Witnesses in my Brief, to prove that my Lord of Ailesbury, my Lord Montgomery, and Mr. Cook, were gone before he came in, tho' if any, or either of them were gone, it destroys his Testimony; and if we prove this to you, I wou'd be loath to be one of the Jury that should take away the Prisoner's Life upon this Evidence; no, it he were the vilest Man alive, and much less the Life of the Prisoner at the Bar; for we shall prove (if my Brief be true.) he is a Man of Morals, a Man of Virtue, one that has a great Love for his Country; and this we shall prove by Evidence undeniable▪ Persons of Quality in their Coun∣try, such as serve their Country in Parliament, as their Representatives; we shal shew it by such Evidence, that there will be no Room to doubt of it: He is a Man without any Stain or Blot upon him, til this Accusation; he is the eldest Son of his Father, and Heir to a great Estate; his Father is a great Officer, and a great Getter under this Go∣vernment; and can it be imagin'd, or believ'd, that such a Man would be guilty of the worst of Treasons, to destroy the Religion he professes, to over-turn the State, to ruine his own Estate, himself and his Posterity, which must be the Consequence of it? Nay, if two good Witnesses cou'd be produc'd to testifie it, and if we had not had so much to take off the Credit of Goodman, I cou'd hardly believe it of any Man that was in his right Senses; he must have been a Mad-man if he had done it, one that stood so well with the present Government, and of a Family never tainted with Disloyalty.

Certainly, Gentlemen, when we make out this to you against Mr. Good∣man, the Prisoner can be in no Danger of his Life, from Mr. Goodman's Evi∣dence, tho' he is an unfortunate Man to come under such an Accusation; but I cannot believe that any Jury, upon such a Man's Evidence, will brand an honest Family with the foulest, vilest, blackest Treason that ever was hatch'd; no, Gentlemen, you are Men of Ability and Understanding, and that is it we relie upon; we doubt not but that you will consider the Evidence, and consider your Oaths, and not let the Prisoner's Blood lie at your Doors; therefore we shall go on and call our Witnesses to make out what I have open'd.

Sir B. Shower.

My Lord, we desire to call our Witnesses, and I shall reserve my self to make some Observations after we have given our Evidence: Mr. Serj. has open'd as much as we can prove, and we will now produce our Evidence; First we will shew the Conviction of Goodman: Mr. Bur∣leigh, where is the Conviction?

Mr. Brul.

Here it is, Sir?

Sir. B. Shower.

Where had you it, Sir?

Mr. Burleigh,

Out of the Treasury at Westminster?

Sir B. Shower.

Is it a true Copy, did you examine it there?

Mr. Burleigh.

Yes, it is a true Copy, I did examine it with the Record.

Sir B. Shower.

Then read it, Mr. Tanner.

Cl. of Arr.

Read—Michaelmas Term: Tricesimo secundo Caroli Secundi.

L. C. J. Treby.

Read the Record in English to the Jury.

Cl. of Arr.

(Reads). Be it remember'd, that Sir Robert Sawyer, Knight, Attorney General of our Lord the King that now is, who for the same our Lord the King in this part sueth, came here in the Court of our said Lord the King, before the King himself at Westminster, on Thursday next after three Weeks of St. Michael, the same Term; and for the same our Lord

the King, brought here into the Court of our said Lord the King, before the said King, then and there, a certain Information against Cardell Goodman, late of the Parish of St. Martin in the Fields, in the Country of Middlesex, Gentle∣man, which Information follows in these Words. Scilicet, Middlesex scilicet, Be it remember'd that Sir Robert Sawyer, Knight, Attorney General of our said Lord the King that now is, who for the same our Lord the King, in this behalf sueth, in his own proper Person came here into the Court of our said Lord the King, before the King himself at Westminster, on Thurs∣day next after three Weeks of St. Michael that same Term, and for the same our Lord the King, gives the Court here to understand and be inform'd, That Cardell Goodman, late of the Parish of St. Martin in the Fields, in the Coun∣ty of Middlesex, Gentleman, being a Person of a wicked Mind, and of an ungodly and devilish Disposition, and Conversation and contriving, pra∣ctising, and falsely, maliciously and devilishly intending Death, and Poi∣soning and final Destruction unto the Right Nobel Henry, Duke of Grafton, and George, Duke of Northumberland, and that the aforesaid Cardell Goodman, his most wicked, most impious, and devilish Intentions, Contrivances and Practices aforesaid, to fulfil, perfect, and bring to effect, the thirtieth Day of September, in the six and thirtieth Year of the Reign of our Lord Charles the Second, now King of England, &c. and diverse other Days, and Times, as well before as after, at the Parish of St. Martin in the Fields, in the Country of Middlesex, with Force and Arms, &c. falsely, unlawfully unjust∣ly, wickedly, and devilishly, by unlawful Ways and Means, did solicite, perswade, and endeavour to procure one Alexander Amydei, to prepare and procure two Flasks of Florence Wine, to be mix'd with deadly Poison, for the poisoning of the aforesaid Right Noble, Henry, Duke of Grafton, and George, Duke of Northumberland, and his most impious, and devilish Contrivances, Practices and Intentions aforesaid, to fulfil, per∣fect and the more to bring to effect, the aforesaid Cardell Goodman, the Day and Year abovesaid, at the Parish aforesaid, in the Country aforesaid, false∣ly, unlawfully, unjustly, maliciously and devilishly, did promise and agree, to give unto the aforesaid Alexander Amydei, forty Pieces of Guniea-Gold, of the Value of forty Pound, of lawful Money of England, if he the said Alexander Amydei wou'd prepare, procure and provide two Flasks of Florence Wine, to be mix'd with deadly Poison, for the poisoning of the aforesaid Right Noble Henry, Duke of Grafton, and George, Duke of Northumber∣land; and if the aforesaid Poison with the Wine aforesaid to be mix'd, shou'd effect the Death of the aforesaid Henry, Duke of Grafton, and George, Duke of Northumberland; that then he the said Cardell Goodman, wou'd give unto the said Alexander Amydei, the Summ of one Hundred Pounds, and that beyond Sea he wou'd maintain the said Alexander all the Days of him the said Alexander, to the evil and most pernicious Exam∣ple of all others in the like Case offending, and against the Peace of our said Lord the King that now is, his Crown and Dignity, &c.—Then here is process pray'd by the Attorney General against Mr. Goodman, who comes, and by his Attorney pleads not Guilty, and here is Issue joyn'd.

Sir B. Shower.

Well, see for the Verdict.

Cl. of Arr.

There was a Tryal at Ni••i Prius, and the Jury find that the said Cardell Goodman is Guilty of the Premisses in the Information speci∣fy'd, as by the Information is supposed against him.

Sir B. Shower.

Now read the Judgment.

Cl. of Arr.

Thereupon it is consider'd, that the said Cardell Goodman do pay to the King, the Summ of One Thousand Pounds, for his Fine, im∣pos'd upon him for the Occasion a foresaid, and that the aforesaid Cardell Goodman be committed to the Marshalsea of this Court, in Execution for his fine aforesaid, that he be safely kept there, till he pay his Fine afore∣said; and before that the said Cardell Goodman, is deliver'd out of the Prison aforesaid, he shall give Security to behave himself well, during his Life, and also shall give Security for the Peace to be kept towards the said Lord the King, and all his People, and particularly towards the Right Noble Henry, Duke of Grafton, and George, Duke of Northumberland.

Mr. Serj. Darn.

So, you hear the Record of the Information, Conviction and Judgment, for a very horrid, abominable Crime.

Mr. Att. Gen.

But I desire they may now go on, and read the whole of the Record.

Cl. of Arr.

Reads. And afterwards, to wit, on Friday next after eight Days of St. Hilary, in the thirty sixth, and thirty seventh Years of the Reign of our said Lord the King that now is, before our said Lord the King at Westminster came the aforesaid Sir Robert Sawyer, Knight, Attor∣ney General of the said Lord the King that now is, and acknowledged that the said Cardell Goodman, has satisfy'd to our said Lord the King that now is, of the Judgment aforesaid against him, in Form aforesaid given, therefore the said Cardell Goodman is thereof acquitted, And so forth.

Mr. Serj. Darn.

Call Mr. Charles Edwards, William Cock, Christopher Craw∣ford, Marry Crawford, and Mr. Huntley.

Edwards appear'd upon a Habeas Corpus, directed to the Keeper of Newgate, where he was a Prisoner.

Mr. Baker.

Where is the Warrant of his Commitment? what is he committed for?

Tokefeild.

He is committed for suspicion of Treason, and treasonable Practices.

Mr. Baker.

Is he not committed for High-Treason?

Tokefeild.

No, Sir, he is not.

Mr. Serj. Darn.

What Discourse had you with Mr. Goodman, concerning the Prisoner at the Bar, what did you here him say?

Mr. Baker.

He is not sworn yet, it seems this Gentleman was Dundee's Chaplain in Scotland.

Mr. Attorn. Gen.

If he be not sworn, he can give no Evidence.

Mr. Serj. Darn.

My Lord, we desire he may be sworn.

L. C. J. Treby.

Sware him, (which was done).

Mr. Serj. Darn.

Pray, Sir, will you tell the Court, and the Jury, what you know of any Discourse of Mr. Goodman's, concerning the Prisoner at the Bar.

Edwards.

My Lord, I desire to know, being ignorant of the Law, whether I am brought here by the common course of Justice or not?

Mr. Serj. Darn.

Sir, we have subpena'd you for the Prisoner at the Bar, to give Evidence of the truth of you Knowledge here upon Oath.

L. C. J. Treby.

Would you have us tell you how you came here? We suppose you came by due Process of Law, as a Witness.

Edwards.

Then, my Lord, I desire to speak but one Word, that is a strange thing to me to consider, how Words should be carried away that were privately spoken, as if it were to expose me to the Reproaches

of all my Friends; it is a thing that I did never expect to hear of again: however, seeing I am called here, and obliged upon my Oath to declare what I know, I, by God's Grace, will to the uttermost of my power, tell what has pass'd in this Matter.

L. C. J. Treby.

Don't make any Apologies for telling the Truth; you are obliged by your Oath to do it, and the Court expects it from you.

Edwards.

Among other Discourses that pass'd betwixt Mr. Goodman and me, I ask'd him when Mr. Cook was to be arraigned, and when he was to be tryed; says he, He is to be arraigned upon Monday, and he is to be tryed upon Thursday: I ask'd him whether it was for the Assassination-Plot, and he told me, no; for what then, said I, as being concerned in sending Mr. Chernock into France? Who are the Evidences against him, said I? said he, Capt. Porter, and my self; said I, I believe two Witnesses will be found good, or by way of Demonstration in Law; and I pity the poor Gentle∣man's Case. Says he, He swore against me; how comes it then, said I, that he is not come off, and has not a Pardon, and would divulge no Body else?

L. C. J. Treby.

Who had not a Pardon do you mean?

Edwards. Mr. Cook.

I ask'd how he had not a Pardon; says he, he wou'd give an account of no body else but me, and that was the Reason he had no Pardon; said I to him, who are the Evidences against him? says he, Capt. Porter, and my self, and after this, says he, he, or I, must perish, or he, or I, must suffer, I believe the word was suffer; but, says he, 'tis a foolish thing to be hang'd; all that's said of a Man that is hang'd, is, that he hang'd hansomly, or he dy'd bravely, that's all the Discourse that I can remember.

Mr. Serj. Darn.

He said it was a foolish thing to be hang'd, and Mr. Goodman, it seems, had no mind to be hang'd; and I believe so too: but he must not hang my Client, to save his own life.

Edwards.

Now, by the same Oath that I have sworn, I knew nothing of being brought hither, till my words were carry'd away privately from me, and has been consulted of, and return'd to me back again; and I was far from suborning or carrying away a Discourse privately to make any advantage of it.

Mr. Serj. Darn.

Now we will call Crawford, and Huntley, and Cock.

Mr. Attorn. Gen.

I desire that Gentleman that was last examin'd may not go away.

[Crawford, Huntley, and Cock were sworn.]

Sir. B. Shower.

Set up Mr. Crawford (which was done) pray, Sir, will you re∣collect your self; do you remember when my Lord of Ailesbury and Capt. Porter din'd at the King's Head.

Crawford.

Yes; it was about a twelve month ago.

Mr. Serj. Darn.

What Company was there?

Crawford.

My Lord of Ailesbury, Sir John Friend, Sir John Fenwick, Sir William Parkyns, Capt. Porter, and two or three more, I did not know their Names.

Sir. B. Shower.

How many were there that din'd there?

Crawford.

I think about Eight in all.

Sir. B. Shower.

Was the Room shut while they were there, or did the Ser∣vants and Drawers, go up and down commonly?

Crawford.

Yes they did go up and down commonly.

Sir B. Shower.

After Dinner did any body come to them while they were there?

Crawford.

No, not during my Lord of Ailesbury's stay, and my Lord Montgomery went away with him?

Sir. B. Shower.

About time did my Lord of Ailesbury go away?

Crawford.

I think it was about four a Clock.

Sir. B. Shower.

How can you tell it?

Crawford.

I did attend upon them the most part of the time.

Sir. B. Shower.

Did you see him go away?

Crawford.

Yes, I did.

Sir B. Sh.

Was that Gentleman, Mr. Goodman, there, when they went away?

Crawford.

I did not see him there, to my Remembrance; no body came in there before they went away, saving their own Servants.

Mr. Serj. Darn.

Do you know Mr. Cook, the Prisoner at the Bar, was he one of the Gentlemen that were at your House?

Crawford.

Yes, I did not well remember or recollect, till I saw him on Saturday last.

Mr. Attorn. Gen.

Was he one that went away?

Crawford.

I do not remember truly, Sir.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Prav how long was it after Dinner that they went away?

Crawford.

I think it was not an Hour.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Was you there all the time, from the time of the Dinner?

Crawf.

No, not all the while I was not in the Room, but going to and fro.

Mr. Serj. Darn.

You say Mr. Goodman did not come up till after they were gone?

Crawford.

No, I did not see him.

Mr. Attorn. Gen.

Did you see him at all?

Crawford.

No, I did not see him at all.

Mr. Attorn. Gen.

Just now it was said he did not come till they were gone, and now it seemes he did not see him at all.

Crawford.

I do not know that he was there at all.

L. C. J. Tre.

But, Brother Darnall, you open'd it, that Mr. Goodman came after my Lord of Ailesbury was gone, and now you will prove it that he came not at all.

Sir. B. Shower.

My Lord, we do not pretend to falsifie his Evidence for any thing more than is material for the Prisoner; we say Mr. Goodman was not in the Room where they din'd till those Persons went away, if in any particular we disprove him. it is sufficient for us; if we can shew that he was not there till three of those that he had nam'd were gone away, that answers our end. We are not concerned if he came at four, five, or six a Clock, and discours'd with Chernock till twelve a Clock at Night.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Pray reserve your Remarks, but only observe now what he says, that Mr. Goodman came not at all thither, and that is more than you pretended to open.

Mr. Conyers.

How many were there that were there at dinner?

Crawf.

About eight.

Mr. Conyers.

How many do you name that you know?

Crawf.

My Lord of Ailesbury, Sir John Friend, Sir John Fenwick, Sir William Parkyns, and Capt. Porter, there were several others; two or three more, but I did not know their Names.

Mr. Conyers.

Did you see Mr. Goodman come in at any part of the Day afterwards?

Crawf.

I do not know that Mr. Goodman.

Mr. Cowper.

Mr. Crawford, you say, that for an hour after Dinner you were sometimes in the Room and sometimes out; when you were out of the Room, were you always in the Passage up to the Room?

Crawf.

No, I was not.

Mr. Cowper.

Cou'd any Man come in or out without your seeing?

Crawf.

I should have known him above stairs when I came in again.

Mr. Cowper.

Why, you say, there were two or three above that you did not know.

Crawf.

I knew them by Sight, if not their Names.

Mr. Cowper.

Were you always in sight then?

Crawf.

No, Sir, I tell you I was up and down.

Sir. B. Shower.

Was there any body came in before my Lord of Ailesbury went out, that is, any body besides those that din'd there?

Crawf.

No.

Sir B. Shower.

My Lord, we are not contending now about a Man's come∣ing up without his knowledge, but whether any such Man, as Mr. Goodman, came up and staid there, during the Consultation, and we insist upon it; there was no body there, till my Lord of Ailesbury, my Lord Montgomery, and Mr. Cook were gone, but those that din'd there: now I would ask a Question again of him, was there any body but who din'd there, till my Lord of Ailesbury went away?

Crawf.

No, there was not.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Why do you say so? How do you know that?

Crawf.

I did not see any body.

Mr. Sol. Gen.

Did you attend upon other Rooms, as well as that, at the same time?

Crawf.

Yes, I did.

Mr. Sol. Gen.

Then how is it possible that he can swear that Mr. Goodman was not there?

Sir B. Shower.

Do you remember when my Lord of Alesbury and they went away?

Crawford.

It was about Four a Clock.

Sir B. Shower.

Were you there in the Room when they went away?

Crawf.

I went out with my Lord to the Coach.

Sir B. Shower.

Did you see him come down Stairs, or did you go up Stairs then?

Crawf.

I went up Stairs when the Coach was called.

Sir B. Shower.

Was then any body there but such as din'd there?

Crawf.

I did not see any body there but those that din'd there.

Mr. Cowper.

But, my Lord, he does not know all that din'd there neither.

L. C. J. Treby. Mr. Crawford,

you say my Lord of Ailesbury and others went away about Four a Clock; pray how long did the rest of the Com∣pany stay there?

Crawf.

I cannot remember. They stay'd there pretty late: it is a pretty while ago.

L. C. J. Treby.

About what hour did they part?

Crawf.

I cannot remember what time the rest went away; our House is fuller at Night than at Noon; and I waited upon other Companies. It was pretty late before they went away, that I am sure.

L. C. J. Treby.

But he cannot remember whether it were Five, or Six, or Twelve that they went away, only he can remember the Hour of Four, that my Lord of Ailesbury and they went away.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

Was it Light, or was it Dark when they went away?

Crawford.

It was Dark.

L. C. J. Treby.

Did you attend the Company after my Lord of Aliesbury was gone?

Crawford.

I went up and down into that Company as I did into others.

L. C. J. Treby.

Was you there several times after my Lord of Ailesbury was gone?

Crawf.

Yes, I was there once or twice after my Lord of Ailesbury was gone, I am sure.

L. C. J. Treby.

And did you never see Mr. Goodman there?

Crawf.

No, I never saw Mr. Goodman in my Life, before I saw him on Saturday last.

Sir B. Shower.

Which is Mr. Huntley?

Huntley.

Here I am, Sir.

Sir B. Shower.

Pray recollect your self, and tell my Lord and the Jury what you remember of any Company that were with Mr. Porter, at the King's-Head, and who din'd there.

Huntley.

My Lord of Ailesbury, my Lord Montgomery, Sir John Fenwick, Sir William Parkyns, Sir John Friend, Mr. Porter and Mr. Chernock.

Sir B. Shower.

That was the Company, you say, that din'd there: Did Mr. Goodman dine there?

Huntley.

No, Mr. Goodman did not dine there.

Sir B. Shower.

Pray, Sir, recollect your self, when did any of this Com∣pany part, or go away?

Huntley.

My Lord of Ailesbury, and my Lord Montgomery went away about four a Clock.

Sir B. Shower.

Sir, how do you know that?

Huntley.

I went down Stairs after them, I was above Stairs when they parted from the rest of the Company.

Mr. Serj. Darn.

Pray mind, Sir, was Mr. Goodman there at that Time before they went away?

Huntley.

No, he was not.

Sir B. Shower.

Are you sure of that, upon the Oath you have taken?

Huntley.

Yes, I take it upon my Oath, he was not there.

Sir B. Shower.

Did you attend them at Dinner?

Huntley.

Yes, I did attend them at Dinner.

Sir B. Shower.

Did you attend them all the while they were there?

Huntley.

I was call'd frequently, and was in and out of the Room very much after Dinner.

Sir B. Shower.

Do you think if a fresh Man had come in after Dinner, you should not have known him?

Huntley.

Yes, I should have known him.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Pray, Friend, let me ask you one Question. Was Mr. Good∣man there at all that Day?

Huntley.

That I don't know, I did not see him at all.

Mr. Sol. Gen.

Did you attend upon any other Rooms that Day?

Huntley.

No, I attended only upon that Company.

Mr. Sol. Gen.

Were you in the Room all the time?

Huntley.

No, I went up and down.

Mr. Sol. Gen.

What time did the last of the Company go away?

Huntley.

It was about Darkish, it was pretty Late to the best of my remembrance.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Pray, did any body come to those Gentlemen after Dinner?

Huntley.

No, Sir.

Mr. Att. Gen.

did you ever see Goodman before now?

Huntley.

Never in my Life, to my Knowledge.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

Did all the Company, but my Lord of Ailesbury, and my Lord Montgomery, stay till it was Duskish?

Huntley.

That I don't know.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

Did you know all the Company that was that Day at Dinner?

Huntley.

I knew all but one.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

And who was that?

Huntley.

That was Mr. Chernock.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

And yet you can't tell whether there was any body else that you did not know, how then can you tell that Goodman was not there?

Sir B. Shower.

He did not know him at that time, but he might remem∣ber him afterwards.

Mr. Conyers.

Did not the same Company use to meet at other Times, at your House?

Huntl.

Not to my Remembrance.

Mr. Con.

How then came you, if they never had us'd to meet there, to know all these People's Names?

Huntley,

I have seen Sir John Friend there, and Sir William Parkyns.

Mr. Con.

Was Sir John Friend there, or no?

Huntl.

Yes, he was.

Mr. Con.

My Lord, he was the only Man that was not nam'd before, you did not name Sir John Friend before, as I heard, but pray, did you ever see Mr. Chernock there, but at that time?

Huntley.

No, I did not.

Mr. Con.

How came you to know it was Mr. Chernock?

Huntl.

I knew very few of them before that time, and I ask'd their Ser∣vants the Names of all those Persons that were there?

Mr. Con.

Did you know Mr. Porter, pray?

Huntl.

Not before that Time, I did see Mr. Porter, and I knew him again when I saw him, his Black told me his Name that Day.

Sir B. Shower.

You, Huntley, I would ask you one Question more, was the Door shut, or no?

Huntl.

No, it was not.

Sir B. Shower.

Did the Servants go up and down as they us'd to do?

Huntl.

Yes, Sir.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Sir Bartholomew would make it that there was no Consul∣tation at all.

Sir B. Shower.

They wer very mad Folks if they wou'd consult at that Rate with the Door open. Pray call Mr. William Cock, (who was sworn).

Mr. Att. Gen.

Sir John Friend has own'd it, that's dead.

Sir B. Shower.

Sir John Friend's Confession is nothing to the Prisoner.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Mr. Serj. Darnall did open, that the Confession of those that dy'd, was an undeniable Proof of the Conspiracy; but go on with your Evidence.

Mr. Sarj. Darn.

Pray Mr. Cock, will you recollect your self, about the Time when Cap. Porter, and some other Gentlemen din'd at your House.

W. Cock.

Yes, very well.

Mr. Serj. Darn.

Pray, Sir, can you tell who din'd there at that time?

W. Cock.

There were my Lord of Ailesbury, my Lord Montgomery, Sir Wil∣liam Parkyns, Sir John Fenwick, Sir John Friend, Mr. Chernock, Cap. Porter and Mr. Cook.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

Was that all the Company?

W. Cock.

Yes, it was.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

One of them said there were Eight.

L. C. J. Treby.

and he has nam'd Eight, Brother.

M. Serj. Darn.

Can you remember when any of the Company went away, and who went away first?

Cock.

My Lord of Aylesbury and my Lord Montgomery went away in a Hackney Coach; and their Servants were frequently in the Room, and waited afterwards in another Room, after that they had waited at Table at Dinner; and tho' the Door was shut, as it used to be when any Company is there, yet no body was forbid to come there at all.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Do you remember when Mr. Goodman came there?

Cock.

I never saw Mr. Goodman in my life before to day.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Did any body come to this Company before my Lord of Aylesbury went away that did not Dine there?

Cock.

I did not see any body there at all; and my Lord of Aylesbury was about buying a Hogshead of White-wine, but we could not agree about the Price: And when my Lord of Aylesbury went away, I went down with my Lord, and waited upon him to the Coach; and I told my Lord, I hoped he would buy the Wine still. But he answered, He could not tell whether he should or no.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Who else went with my Lord of Aylesbury?

Cock.

My Lord Montgomery. I don't remember any body else.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

Did all the rest of the Company go away at once?

Cock.

Truly, my Lord, I can't say they did.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

By what time did the rest go away?

Cock.

I believe it might be Eight or Nine a Clock.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

You saw my Lord of Aylesbury when he parted: Was Mr. Goodman there then?

Cock.

I did not see him.

Mr. B. Powis.

Did Mr. Cook stay till the last?

Cock.

That I can't tell truly.

Mr. B. Powis.

I find they all Swear to Four a Clock of my Lord Aylesbury's going, and go no further.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Pray, Sir, let me ask you a Question or two: Did you ever see Mr. Goodman before now?

Cock.

No, I do not remember I did.

Mr. Att. Gen.

When you went into the Room after Dinner, did you look about the Room to see whether there were any new Company?

Cock.

I did look about the Room several times, and so did my Servants, to see if there were any thing wanting.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Can you take it upon your Oath, that he was not there whilst my Lord of Aylesbury staid?

Cock.

I do, and can take it upon my Oath, he was not.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Then if you can, pray distinguish the time when he came in.

Cock.

I do not remember that ever I saw him in my Life before to day.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Why are you not as positive that he was not there at all, as that he was not there before my Lord of Aylesbury went away?

Cock.

He might come in, and I not see him.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Might he not as well come in before they went away, as after to come in and you not see him?

Cock.

No, I do not think he cou'd.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Why do you think so?

Cock.

Because the Servants were all about, and they did not go to Dinner till two a Clock; and I believe those Gentlemen that I named came in a quarter of an Hour's time to Dinner.

Mr. Att. Gen.

We do not say he came there before Dinner; but cou'd he not come in after Dinner, before my Lord of Aylesbury and my Lord Mont∣gomery went away, without your seeing him?

Cock.

Yes, Sir.

Sir B. Shower.

Then heark ye, Sir, I wou'd ask you one Question, Did you see him, upon your Oath, or not?

Cock.

No, I did not.

Sir B. Shower.

Might not Mr. Goodman come in to them without your seeing him?

Cock.

It is possible, but I don't think it was so.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

How then can you be positive that he was not there till my Lord of Aylesbury went?

Mr. Sol. Gen.

You say you may be positive he was not there before my Lord of Aylesbury went: Can you be as positive now, that he was not there before Mr. Cook went?

Cock.

I do not know when Mr. Cook went.

Mr. Sol. Gen.

How can you be then positive he was not there before my Lord of Aylesbury went?

Cock.

There were no more than what Dined there when my Lord of Ayles∣bury went away.

Mr. Conyers.

Pray, Sir, let me ask you a Question: Were you in the Room at any time after Dinner?

Cock.

Yes, I was, Sir.

Mr. Conyers.

Pray, Sir, how many times after Dinner were you there?

Cock.

I believe half a dozen times.

Mr. Sol. Gen.

And yet you do confess that Mr. Goodman might come in af∣ter Dinner before my Lord of Aylesbury went, and you not see him?

Sir B. Shower.

Ay, but he could not stay there without his seeing him, if he was so often in the Room; you don't take Mr. Cock's Evidence right.

Mr. Att. Gen.

You named Eight Persons that Dined at your House; Did you know them all personally before that day?

Cock.

Yes, my Lord, the most of them at least.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Did they use to meet at your House?

Cock.

Commonly Sir John Friend did once a Week. Mr. Chernock I knew when I was a Drawer, and so I did Sir William Parkyns: The rest knew by hearing their Names.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Did you know them before that Day Sir, I ask you?

Cock.

I had seen Captain Porter several times before that Day, but I can∣not say at my own House.

Sir B. Shower.

Do you remember the Treaty about the Hogshead of White∣wine?

Cock.

Yes, Sir, very well.

Sir B. Shower.

Were you by when my Lord of Aylesbury went away, and spoke with him about it?

Cock.

Yes, I was; and told him, I hoped he would buy the Wine still.

Sir B. Shower.

Can you be positive that any body was there before my Lord of Aylesbury went away, that cou'd stay there any time, and did not Dine there?

Cock.

I believe not, Sir; for I came in half a dozen times after Dinner, and I believe if I had heard Mr. Goodman's Name, or seen him there, I shou'd have remembred it; but I did not see any body but those that Dined there.

Mr. Cowper.

Where was you when my Lord of Aylesbury went away? Where did you meet him going away?

Cock.

Upon the Stairs; seeing my Lord of Aylesbury and my Lord Mont∣gomery coming down, I met them.

Mr. Cowper.

Where did you meet them? At the middle, or the top of the Stairs?

Cock.

My Lord of Aylesbury was at the top of the Stairs.

Mr. Cowper.

Did you meet him just coming out of the Room?

Cock.

Yes, Sir, I saw the Coach that was called for my Lord; and so I went up Stairs, and met my Lord at the top of the Stairs coming down.

Mr. Sol. Gen.

Now how can you be positive who was in the Room when he came out of the Room?

Cock.

I went up into the Room after my Lord of Aylesbury went away.

Mr. Sol. Gen.

How long after my Lord of Aylesbury went away?

Cock.

It was presently after.

Mr. Sol. Gen.

How long before my Lord of Aylesbury went away, had you been in the Room?

Cock.

I had been there just before.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Call Thomas Peachy.

(Who appeared, and was Sworn.)

Sir B. Shower.

My Lord, we shall prove that after the Plot broke out, and after Mr. Porter had made his Discovery, there was no disturbance of Mr. Cook 'till a good while after Chernock's Trial; and Mr. Cook was so far from being sensible or conscious of any guilt, that he never absconded, but continued for three weeks in his Father's House, where he was taken by a Messenger, Pray Mr. Peachy will you tell my Lord, and the Jury, where Mr. Cook was taken, and when, and by whom?

Peachy.

He was taken at his Father's House by a Messenger, about seven a Clock in the morning.

Sir B. Shower.

What day of the Week was it he was taken?

Peachy.

Upon a Sunday morning, in his own Room, in his Father's House, at seven a Clock in the morning.

Sir B. Shower.

Did People come to him as they used to do?

Peachy.

Yes, and he went frequently abroad as he used to do, and did never abscond from his Father's House.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Pray Swear Mr. Treganna.

(Which was done.)

Sir B. Shower.

Mr. Treganna, pray do you remember how long after the Plot broke out did you see Mr. Cook?

Treganna.

After Mr. Chernock's Trial a Week he was at my Chamber, after the Plot broke out, he was concerned in a Trial at Winchester Assizes, upon an Issue out of Chancery, Mr. Nicholls was the Clerk in Court, and went down to manage it at the Assizes; and Mr. Cook came to me a day or two after Winche∣ster Assizes was over, and ask'd me if I had any news from the Assizes? This was long after the Plot broke out, and I remember particularly that I saw him twice after the Plot was discovered, at my Chamber.

Sir B. Shower.

Swear Mr. Nicholls.

(Which was done.)

Sir, pray will you tell my Lord and the Jury what you know of Mr. Cook's ap∣pearing abroad after the Plot was discovered?

Mr. Nicholls.

I was sent down to the Trial, I was present and did attend at two Trials indeed, and I suppose Mr. Baron Powis may remember that I attend∣ed at two Trials at Winchester Assizes.

Mr. B. Powis.

Possibly you might, Sir; I can't tell all the Attendance at the Assizes.

Mr. Nicholls.

And after my return from Winchester Assizes, Mr. Cook was with me several days, both at my Office, and Chamber, and at his Father's Office; and I remember particularly that he threatned me that I was in trouble when I was at Winchester, and therefore I remember it very well.

Sir. B. Shower.

Mr. Nicholls, you know Mr. Cook very well, pray what are his Morals?

Mr. Nicholls.

Upon occasion of the Cause in Chancery that went to Trial, I have had the knowledge of Mr. Cook five or six years, I always believed him to be as temperate a man as ever I met with. I think in five years time I was not above once with him in a Tavern.

Sir B. Shower.

Did you ever hear him Swear?

Mr. Nicholls.

No, never, nor vent a Curse; I believe he drank as little as any man, and was as godly a man; I never heard him speak a foul word.

Sir B. Shower.

How do you know that, Sir, that he was so godly a man?

Mr. Nicholls.

Upon occasion of this Cause I was several times at Sir Miles Cook's, and at Mr. Cook's Lodgings there, and we were to go about Business, and after he was drest, he has made me stay while he went into his Closet and

said his Prayers. And he told me further, that he never went out of his Father's doors without saying his Prayers; and I was forc'd to stay at the door while he perform'd his Devotions, as he told me, and I believe he did.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Now, my Lord, we will call some other Witnesses to prove his good affection to his Country, how he continually desired success to the Fleet, and to the Army.

Sir B. Shower.

So that really he had an aversion to it.

Swear Mr. Hamond. (Which was done.)

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Pray, Sir, will you give an account what you know of the Prisoner, concerning his Judgment, and concerning his Morals?

Hamond.

I have been for some time acquainted with Mr. Cook the Prisoner at the Bar, and to the best of my observation, I always took him to be a Conscien∣tious Man, and I have heard him declare great detestation of a French Force; and three or four days before he was taken into Custody, I ask'd him what he heard of Intelligence? he said he heard what was in the publick Prints, and heard no more, and knew no more; and he had a great abhor∣rence of the Conspiracy, and thought it a very monstrous thing; I never heard him speak a disrespectful word of the King's Person or Government in my life: And I say again, I have heard him several times declare in common Con∣versation, that he had an aversion to a French Power, and he had a dread of it.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

What have you heard him say about our Fleet, or Army?

Hamond.

My Lord, I have heard him very much wish Prosperity and Suc∣cess to our Fleet.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

What Fleet, pray Sir?

Hamond.

To our Fleet, King William's Fleet against the French; things to this purpose he has frequently said.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Then Swear Mrs. Hunt.

(Which was done) but she was not Examined.

Sir B. Shower.

My Lord, we leave it here; but I must beg the favour, that if they give any new Evidence, and there be occasion, we may have liberty to answer it. And I have an Observation or two to make when the Evidence is over.

Mr. Att. Gen.

My Lord, if they have done with their Evidence, I beg leave to observe that there is something arises upon that Evidence, that will give us occasion to call a Witness or two more. My Lord, the first Witness which they call was Edwards, and he is in Custody upon suspicion of High Treason in Newgate, and he gives an account of some discourse that he had with Mr. Goodman; and for that it will be necessary for us to call Mr. Porter again, and Mr. Delarue, to shew that this Edwards the Witness, as he is Committed for suspicion of High Treason, so he was in the Conspiracy for the Assassination; he was one in the List that was brought back by Cranburne from Mr. Chernock to Captain Porter, as one of Chernock's Men, and he is in Custody for it. Then as to the other mat∣ter, they have called three Witnesses to prove that Mr. Goodman was not in this place at this time. The Councel indeed opened it that he was not at the Ta∣vern 'till after my Lord of Aylesbury and my Lord Montgomery were gone away, but their Evidence goes further, that he was not there at all; and the Master of the House says, he was not there to his knowledge at any time. So that if their Evidence prove any thing, they prove that he was not there at all, they do not remember that they saw him there; so that the Question will be, whe∣ther Mr. Goodman was there at that time, and it will be necessary to call Mr. Goodman again, and Mr. Porter, to confront these Witnesses, who will tell you when he came in; and particularly as to my Lord of Aylesbury, that he went with him to the Stairs-head, and my Lord would not let him go further, but he went back again when my Lord of Aylesbury went down stairs. We will begin with the Witnesses, as to this Edwards.

Swear Mr. Delarue. (Which was done.)

Mr. Conyers.

Mr. Delarue, pray do you know Mr. Edwards that was here?

Mr. Delarue.

He goes by several Names, I know him by the Name of Douglas; and last Monday I came into the Press-Yard, and saluted him by the Name of Douglas, and he said he had taken his own Name again, by which he was known at St. Germains, and that was Edwards or Richards, as I remember, or some such Name.

Mr. Conyers.

When was he at St. Germains?

Mr. Delarue.

About three or four years ago.

Mr. Conyers.

Pray look upon him, see if you know him.

Mr. Delarue.

I know him very well, there he stands, that is the Person in the black Wig; he was reputed at St. Germains to be my late Lord Dundee's Chaplain.

Mr. Att. Gen.

What Name did he go by at St. Germains.

Mr. Delarue.

I can't very well tell; but he said he had taken his own Name again; and I think he said it was Edwards, or Richards.

Mr. Conyers.

Did he go formerly by the Name of Douglas?

Mr. Delarue.

Yes, here in England; Mr. Porter knew him to go by that Name.

Mr. Att. Gen.

What else do you know of him?

Mr. Delarue.

The List that Mr. Cranburn carried from Mr. Porter to Mr. Cher∣nock, and which he brought back again from Mr. Chernock to Mr. Porter, had in it among the other Names the Name of Douglas, which I understood to be that Gentleman.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Did he go by that Name at that time?

Mr. Delarue.

Yes he did.

L. C. J. Treby.

Pray repeat that again, Sir, that we may understand it, and see whether it be Evidence.

Mr. Delarue.

Why, Sir, the List that Mr. Cranburn brought from Mr. Cher∣nock to Mr. Porter, at the Foot of the List which Mr. Porter had sent to him, there were other Names written, as I believe, in Mr. Chernock's Hand; and among those Names there was the Name of Douglas, which I understood to be this Mr. Edwards, as he calls himself. And moreover, when Mr. Porter went out of Town, going to Doctor's Commons, I called at Mr. Chernock's and he had a great deal of Company with him, 4 or 5 Troopers, and among the rest this Edwards or Douglas was there sitting by him. Here is a Gentleman that I see upon the Bench, I think he is a Scotch-man, that knew him at St. Germains as well as I. I think his Name is Mack Donnel.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

What Country-man did you take this Edwards to be?

Mr. Delarue.

A Scotch-man, and Chaplain to my Lord Dundee that was kil∣led in Scotland.

Mr. Serj. Darnall.

Did you see this Gentleman in France, Sir?

Mackdonnel.

I never was in France in my Life.

Mr. Att. Gen.

You can't ask him the Question; you know it tends to make him either accuse or excuse himself of a Crime. Pray call Mr. Porter again. But in the mean time, till he comes, we'll examine Mr. Goodman, because he is here. Mr. Goodman, you were by, and heard what these Drawers said concerning your being at the Old King's-Head in Leadenhall-street that day. Pray give an Account when you came in, whether you saw my Lord of Aylesbury, and what passed be∣tween you at my Lord of Aylesbury's going away?

Mr. Goodman.

Mr. Porter brought me up; and when I came in they were all sitting; and after Salutation I sat down: And when they had consulted some time, they came to a Resolution, as I have told you already. The Fellows are so far in the right of it, that my Lord of Aylesbury and my Lord Montgomery went away first; for I took my leave of them at the Head of the Stairs. Says my Lord of Aylesbury to me, Pray avoid Ceremony, we will go away privately as we came, in a Hackney Coach. And as to the Master of the House, who says, he does not know me, I have Dined several times there, four or five times with Sir John Friend; and one particular Day above all the rest, I remember I was

not well, and I went down Stairs to the Bar, and said, I pray can you get me a little Brandy. He said, Yes, he would help me to some of the best in England. And he brought me up some which I like very well: And thinking he had a Quantity of it, I askt him what I shou'd give him a Gallon for a Parcel. But he said, He had but a little; and I am sure he has seen me there five or six times.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Then set up that Master of the House Cock again. (Which was done) Come, Sir, you hear what Mr. Goodman has sworn, and mind it, you are upon your Oath. You said just now, that you never saw Mr. Goodman before.

Cock.

No upon my Word, Sir, I don't know that ever I saw him before.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Do you remember nothing of his being with Sir John Friend at your House?

Cock.

No, upon my Word, Sir.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Nay, you are upon your Oath. Nor do you know nothing of your giving of him Brandy?

Cock.

No, upon my Oath, I do not remember any such thing.

Mr. Att. Gen.

That is a very safe way of swearing, I profess.

Mr. Conyers.

He remembers the particular time when he was sick, and you of∣fer'd to sell him some Brandy.

Mr. Att. Gen.

No, he askt him what he should give him for it a Gallon. But, Mr. Cock, did you ever see Goodman in your House since my Lord of Aylesbury and they were there?

Cock.

No, upon my Word, Sir, I did not; and I never had but two Gallons of Brandy in my Life at a time; and I never had any Cask, or any thing of that nature, to sell any out of.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Who used to be with Sir John Friend at your House?

Cock.

There used to be Mr. Richardson, and Justice Cash, and Col. Cash.

Mr. Goodman.

Mr. Richardson was there that day: I could almost have re∣membred the particular day, but I cannot be positive; only we were in the same Room where the Consultation was, at the further part of the Room.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

You, Friend, the Master of the House, you hear what Mr. Goodman says: He says he was with Sir John Friend at your House, and being not well, he askt for some Brandy, and you told him, You'd give him some of the best in England. And he propounded to you then to sell him some of it; but it seems there was no Bargain made. Do you remember any such thing of one that was with Sir John Friend, that spoke of buying of Brandy when he was sick?

Cock.

No, upon my Word I do not.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Then set up Mr. Porter (who stood up.) Pray Mr. Porter, look upon that man in the black Perriwig; what Name did he use to go by?

Mr. Porter.

He used to go by the Name of Edwards.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Had he any other Name?

Mr. Porter.

Yes, Douglas.

Mr. Att. Gen.

He has so many Names, that we don't know which his is true Name. Mr. Porter, pray what else do you know of him touching his being concerned in the Conspiracy?

Mr. Porter.

I know not any thing of my own Knowledge; but his Name was put down in the List that Mr. Chernock sent me of his men, and Mr. Delarue read his Name there.

Mr. Sol. Gen.

Mr. Porter, you were a Witness upon the Trials of Sir John Friend and Sir William Parkyns; did you give Evidence that Mr. Goodman was in the Room at the same time when the Consultation was?

Mr. Porter.

Yes, Sir.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Well, you hear that these People have sworn, that Mr. Good∣man did not come till my Lord of Aylesbury went away; nay indeed, that he was not there at all.

Mr. Porter.

My Lord, upon my Oath he was there before my Lord Aylesbury went away, and Mr. Goodman bowed, and took leave of my Lord as he went out of doors.

Mr. Att. Gen.

What time did my Lord of Aylesbury go away?

Mr. Porter.

It was about an hour and a half, or two hours after Dinner, and he was in the Room when my Lord went away, for he took his leave of him at the door.

Mr. Cowper.

Do you remember the manner of Mr. Goodman's coming in?

Mr. Porter.

Mr. Goodman sent up his Name to me, and I told the Com∣pany, and promis'd for him, that he was a very honest Man, and much in King James's Interest; and then with their consent I went down and brought him up.

Mr. J. Powell.

How long time do you think there was between Mr. Good∣man's coming in, and my Lord of Aylesbury's going away?

Mr. Porter.

I cannot tell that, I do not remember exactly how long it was.

Mr. J. Powell.

Was it a quarter of an hour, or half an hour?

Mr. Porter.

A great deal longer, for we had discoursed of the whole busi∣ness after Mr. Goodman came into the Room.

Mr. Conyers.

How long were they there after Mr. Goodman came in?

Mr. Porter.

It was very near two hours after he came in, before they went away; they did not go away 'till six a Clock, and he came in at four, as near as I can remember.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Then, my Lord, we have done.

Sir B. Shower.

Then I beg the favour of a word or two, my Lord. May it please your Lordship, and you Gentlemen of the Jury, I am of Counsel in this Case for the Prisoner at the Bar, and I must beg your Lordship's pa∣tience, and your favour, Gentlemen, to make a few Observations upon the Evidence that has been given; for we humbly insist upon it in point of Law, that here is not sufficient Evidence before you to Convict the Priso∣ner. You are, Gentlemen, to have respect and regard to your Consciences and the Oaths which you have now taken to give a Verdict, and make true Deliverance between the King, and the Prisoner; you are not to go according to your own private Opinions, nor according to publick Fame, nor according to common Report, nor according to the Verdicts in other Cases, nor according to the Confessions or Dying Speeches of Criminals who have been Executed, whether made by themselves, or by others for them; but you are to go by the Testimony of Credible Witnesses, and if you have not the Evidence of two Credible Witnesses before you, my Lords the Judges will inform you how the Law stands. That by the Sta∣tute of Edward the Sixth, and the New Statute for Trials of Treasons, there must be two Witnesses to prove the Prisoner guilty of the Overt Act of the Treason that is laid in the Indictment; and whether there have been two Credible Witnesses produced before you, is the Question that you are to consider upon your Oath and Conscience; that is, whether you are sa∣tisfied here be two such as the Law requires. The Question is not meerly whether Mr. Cook be Guilty, but whether in your Consciences he be legally prov'd Guilty; whether there be Evidence to satisfie your Consciences, ac∣cording to the Laws of the Land, that he is Guilty; and we insist there is not; and therefore I beg leave to recapitulate what was been Sworn against him, that we may see how far it reaches, and wherein it is defective.

Gentlemen, Mr. Porter he Swears that about the beginning or middle of May, he cannot tell which, there was this Meeting at the Old King's-Head Tavern in Leaden-Hall-Street; in which, I wou'd observe to you, that he confines himself to a certain Month; the Reason is very plain, and there∣fore I ask'd him whether it was not in April; for if he had said it had been then, there had been no danger to the Prisoner, because of the Act of Indempnity, therefore he was careful to fix it in May; and he wou'd not lay it in June, for the Tenth of June is a Famous Day; and then, or soon after, Newgate had him; he was Confined there for a Riot on that Day, and so they have restrained it to a Month, and the only Month that he is capable of Swearing to, as to any Act done the last year 'till they came in January to the Assassination Plot, which the Prisoner is not accused to have had any Concern in; but it shou'd seem he cannot tell what Day of the Week, or of the Month, but about the beginning or the middle of May eight Persons Dined at this place, and then after Din∣ner Mr. Goodman came in, and they discours'd about this matter.

First, Gentlemen, we insist upon it, that it is very improbable that Eng∣glish Protestants of pious Conversation and good Morals, shou'd agree, as he says, to send such a Message to the late King, to Invite over a French Popish Force; we may easily see the horrid and mischievous Consequen∣ces that wou'd have followed such a practice, such as must affect every English-man with a Concern, so that it is improbable a Man of Vertue and Piety cou'd engage in such an Enterprize; and if it it be improbable, you will never believe it, unless the Conviction or Proof be irresistable: And if you have any other Reasons to distrust this Man's Truth, then we hope you will go upon the side of probability; and not let Popular Prejudice, Common Fame, or any thing else but Legal and Undeniable Evidence have the Ascendant over you. If you are not satisfied that Mr. Cook did assent (as from the Character of the Man it is not pro∣bable he shou'd) to send Chernock into France, to perswade King Lewis and King James to send Ten Thousand Men to Invade our Country, then he is not Guilty.

In the next place, Gentlemen, he is not Guilty we say in the Eye of the Law, if they have not two Witnesses; and for that we say you have but one, or but one that is to be believed; and if you have but one that is to be believed, that in Law is but one, and consequently my Client is not Guilty; so the King's Councel agree, that if there be but one Witness, he cannot be Convicted, the Law is plain in the Case. Now to make it out that here is but one Witness at most, we have offered you several Objections, and made them out by Evidence, against the Testimony of Mr. Goodman; that he is not a Person fit to be believed; and if he be out of the Case, then does Mr. Porter's stand alone, and all will amount but to one Witness, suppose it shou'd be granted that his Testimony were true.

First, We have read a Record of Conviction against him, of a Crime, one of the greatest next unto Treason, that is known in our or any other Law. That he hired a Man to Poison two Dukes, Branches of a Noble Family, to which he had such great Obligations, as all Man∣kind do know, and he himself cannot but acknowledge; and if there were not that aggravation in it, of his Obligations to that Family, yet to lie

in wait to Murder and Poyson, is such an Offence as any Age can seldom show the like. And the Objection is not so very easily answer'd as they would have it; nor can it be so soon passed over as they think, by saying He is a Witness of a Confederacy with which the Prisoner is accus'd, a Crime greater than the thing objected. It is true, none can bear Testi∣mony in such a business, but he that is a Party: But, we say, if these Persons, who come and set up themselves for Witnesses, were not probi Ho∣mines, and did not appear to be persons of indifferent Credit between Man and Man, and did not stand impartial in the Eye of the World in other respects before, then they are not to be believ'd, as to what they charge themselves and others to be guilty of. Now, if Mr. Goodman stand convicted of such an Offence as this that is alledg'd against him, tho' he is pardon'd by the Act of Parliament, or Satisfaction acknowledg'd upon the Record, tho' it be even the very next Term, yet that does not purge him from the Infamy and Disgrace, or from the Imputation of being concern'd in so Villanous a Design. It is impossible that he should be a good Witness that wou'd be engag'd in such a matter; especially when we have those Various Witnesses, and such a Concurring Testimony, that what he has Sworn is absolutely False.

Gentlemen, if there were nothing but his own Testimony in the Case, there could be no Question at all in it: And as to Captain Porter's Testimo∣ny about his being there, we have produc'd three Witnesses, who, if they be of Credit, then Mr. Goodman is not to be believ'd, but is falsified through∣out; for, it is not the Question, Whether Mr. Cook went away before the Consultation and the Resolution; for, if my Lord of Ailesbury, or my Lord Montgomery went away, Mr. Goodman is falsify'd in that, and consequently you ought not to believe him in the rest; for he actually Swears, that my Lord of Ailesbury, my Lord Mountgomery, and those other Gentlemen, were all present, and at the Consult, and did consent and agree to the Resoluti∣on, by using these words; Yes, you may; Yes, you may. Now, we say, there are three Witnesses that swear, That my Lord of Ailesbury was gone before he came there. I do not care whether he came there, or not; that is not material: If there were no body there when my Lord of Ailesbury was there but those that were at Dinner, for then Mr. Goodman was not there at any such Consultation, as they would insinuate was at that Time, in that Place, and that Company.

My Lord, we have prov'd to you Mr. Cook's Abherrence and Declaration, which, we think, ought to go a great way in satisfaction of his Innocence, at least to induce you to the favourable Side; for, Gentlemen, you are not brought hither to Convict a Man only, but to Try and Examine him; and it is your Duty to Acquit, as well as Convict, according as the Evidence stands: It is your Duty to go according to your Consciences, and to declare whether he be Guilty, or Not Guilty, upon the Evidence you have before you: You are to Examine the Truth of the Fact in all its Circumstances, and upon your own Consciences to declare, whether he is Guilty or Not Guil∣ty; now we propose it to you, and submit it to your Consciences, That here are Three Witnesses, that speak upon their Oaths, against whom there is no Objection, That ever they were Guilty of lying in wait to Poyson any body, nor in any Plot for an Assassination, nor any Conspiracy for inviting an Invasion from France, nor any other Objection against them, but they stand upright in the Face of the World, and they Three swear, That he was not there at that time. The Answer that we expect, is, That he might be there, and they not see him: And because it was possible he might be there, and they not see him, therefore it is no Evidence: But, My Lord, be∣cause it may be so, is no Evidence that it is so; that's no Objection, for you

will take it as the nature of the thing will afford, and the Matter itself allow. Now there can be no better Evidence than this; That they went in and out continually; the Drawers, and the Master of the House five or six times himself, were in the Room, and they say, There was no such Per∣son there. Why then it is very Improbable, if not Impossible, that any such Man should be there. The one swears, He came down from my Lord of Ailesbury just before he went away; and another says, He follow'd him out of the Room; and the Master says, That he met my Lord of Ailesbury at the Stairs-head. All which falsifies Mr. Goodman in that Particular, That he was with my Lord of Ailesbury at the Stairs-head, when he went away. These are incompatible; and if we falsifie him in any one thing, he is not to be believ'd in any other.

Then, Gentlemen, we offer to your Consideration an Answer to another Objection: They say, these Witnesses seem to swear, That he was not there at all. We are not concern'd whether he was there afterwards, or not: If you are satisfied, that he was not there, as our Witnesses swear, while my Lord of Ailesbury was there, that's enough. But then they make an Obje∣ction, How comes the Master of the House to remember my Lord of Ailes∣bury's going away, more than any body else? Gentlemen, you know the nature of the thing shows, that not only that it was more probable the Ma∣ster of the House should make his Observations near the time of Dinner, rather than afterwards at Night, when there is more Hurry: But it is more probable he should take notice of it from the Quality of the Person, from the Discourse he had with him about the Whitewine, which was a good Medium to refresh a Vintner's Memory, it being a matter in his own Trade, and that might make him call it to mind.

Therefore, Gentlemen, we think these three Witnesses stand free and clear in their Credit; and being so, are inconsistent with Mr. Goodman's Testimony; and, we hope, in favour of Life, the Credit inclines on their side, especially when the Question is, Whether a Man shall be executed for Treason who never fled for it, who was never charg'd with any Treason or Treasonable Practises before; nay, not so much as with any particular Crime. or Immorality: And, whether Three Witnesses shall be believ'd, against whom there is no Objection, rather than Two, against One of which there are such Objections.

My Lord, we are not now debating or attacking the Evidence of the Plot, or arraigning the former Judgments against the Conspirators that have suf∣fer'd; but, Gentlemen, we are putting you now upon a serious Enquiry, (as GOD and your own Consciences shall incline you) whether our Clyent be Guilty or Not Guilty upon this Evidence; that is, whether Mr. Goodman swears true, or not. We hope that we have given you sufficient Satisfa∣ction, that upon Mr. Goodman's part the Evidence is insufficient; and we hope you will accordingly find our Clyent Not Guilty.

Mr. Att. Gen.

If Mr. Cook have any thing to say himself, I desire he may say it now, before we begin.

Sir B. Shower.

No, pray go on, Sir.

L. C. J. Treby.

Mr. Cook, wou'd you say any thing yourself, before the King's Councel sum up?

Cook.

The little I have to say, my Lord, I'll speak now, or by and by, which you please.

L. C. J. Treby.

You must do it now, because after they have summ'd up, there is nothing more to be said by you.

Cook.

My Lord, I thank God, I have liv'd a Life, I hope, as good as any Man, and have often receiv'd the Blessed Sacrament; I have done it con∣stantly, and shall do it speedily, by the Grace of God, as soon as I can have

a Minister come to administer it to me. I did offer it to my own Father, when he came to me, and told me, If would confess this thing I should not come to Tryal: I told my Father, I would not for Ten thousand Worlds take away the Blood of an Innocent man to save mine. I thank God, I am in a very good way to dye; I have, for at least this last Year, frequently recei∣ved the Blessed Sacrament; and how I have liv'd, every body in the Court that knows me can tell my Life and Conversation has been as regular as any man's, and I am as ready to dye to morrow, if occasion was for it (I thank God) as any one; I will receive the Blessed Sacrament upon it; and it is not for Life that I would do any thing that is wrong or unjust: I do love my Nation, and I love the Quiet of the Nation; I never was for disturb∣ing the Government that now is; and I ever was against Foreign Forces or an Invasion, for I never thought of one, or heard of it, but with Abhor∣rence and Detestation: And I do assure faithfully, I shou'd be sorry to di∣sparage Mr. Porter's Evidence, because I would have every body that was concern'd in that Horrid and Barbarous Crime to suffer; in God's Name, let them all suffer. I thank God, I never knew any thing of it, nor of a French Invasion: And I would say more of it, but that I would not hurt Mr. Porter's Evidence, whose Discovery of that Bloody Business has done so much Service. As for Mr. Goodman, as I hope to receive the Blessed Sacra∣ment, and may I perish when I do it, if I speak an Untruth; I would not for any thing, no, not for the Good of my Country, have Innocent Blood spilt; I would lay down my Life to serve my Country, but I would not have my Blood be lightly lost; and how little a Man soever I am, my Blood will lye as heavy upon the Nation as any the weightiest man's can do. I do not doubt your Lordship's Justice, nor the Jury's, but I pray, my Lord, observe; tho' it is usual not to own things at the Bar, yet I do not make this Denial as of Course, but out of Truth; and I assure you, in the presence of the whole Court, if I should suffer for this, I must at my last moments either confess or deny something: And, I say, I do assure, in the presence of the whole Court, and I will take the Blessed Sacrament upon it, that I must, at my Death, deny this whole matter, and that ever I did see Mr. Goodman at all there; I do not think I saw him; I do not remem∣ber I saw Mr. Goodman at all, except once in Germain-street, when the Coach broke, and that must be but in passing by neither, and he would have hurt or kill'd the Coachman, and we kept him from it; and I walk'd with him half the length of Germain-street, before I knew who Mr. Goodman was. If ever a one of those Gentlemen▪ that are Men of Credit and Honour, can say I was any ways so inclined, or that they ever saw me, or knew me, that I ever bought a Pistol or a Blunderbuss, or the like, may God sink and strike me dead; and the Blessed Sacrament, which I intend to receive, be my Curse and Damnation, if I knew of King James's Coming, till after the whole Town rung of it: I had no hand in the Invasion; and, besides my Ab∣horrence of Introducing Foreign Force, I desire your Lordship and the Jury to consider the Circumstances of my Case, that I had but a very small Allowance from my Father, and therefore it is not probable I should take upon me to joyn with my Lord of Ailesbury, and my Lord Montgomery, and those other Gentlemen, to send Chernock into France, to invite over a Foreign Force: And I call God to witness I had no hand in it. I beg your Lordships Pardon for all this Trouble; I would not hurt Mr. Porter's Evi∣dence, for the Reasons that I have told you; but this is for my Life, and I don't so much value that as I do Truth and Sincerity; and I shall receive the Blessed Sacrament, if I dye, that I never did do so. Indeed, I never did take the Oaths, nor did I ever refuse them, because they were never

offer'd me; but I wou'd take the Oaths now if they were offer'd me. My Lord, I beg your Pardon for this Trouble.

L. C. J. Treby.

Have you done, Sir? Have you said all you would say?

Cook.

Yes, my Lord.

L. C. J. Treby.

Then, you Gentlemen of the King's Councel, will you conclude?

Mr. Sol. Gen.

May it please your Lordship, and you Gentlemen of the Jury, I am of Councel in this Case for the King, and I could have been very glad that this Gentleman's Defence that he has made had been stron∣ger than in truth it has been: And I should have been very glad too that his Councel had been able to have made it better for him; but that he and they may be satisfied as much is done as the Case will bear; they have had all the Liberty in the World to make his Defence they could desire, nay, more than in strictness could be allow'd them.

Gentlemen, our Evidence is very positive against the Prisoner at the Bar, and for the Highest Crime that the King's Subjects can be guilty of, by the Confession of the Gentleman himself, and of his Councel. We have, I say, two positive Witnesses against him; they say, They are not Legal ones: I must own, if we have not two Witnesses, we have never an one; for what∣soever falsifies Mr. Goodman's Testimony, falsifies whatsoever Mr. Porter has Sworn. Now, the Evidence that Mr. Porter has given against him, is this: He says, There was to be a Meeting at the Kings-head Tavern in Leaden-hall-street, and there they consulted of the Methods to bring back K. James hither; and it was thought the best way to send to King James to invite the French King to send 1000 Horse, 1000 Dragoous, and 8000 Foot, to land here in this Kingdom, where they would meet him with 2000 Horse. They pitch'd upon a very proper Messenger, Mr. Chernock, a Person that has been attainted, and has suffer'd for High Treason; he was to be sent into France upon this Errand; Mr. Cook, the Prisoner at the Bar, was one of the Persons that were there at that time, and he was consenting to this Message; and Mr. Porter gives you a particular Token relating to the Pri∣soner, for he remembers the Prisoner did kneel upon the Chair, and lean'd his Elbows upon the Table when he consented.

Mr. Porter goes further, and tells you, That Mr. Chernock would have another Meeting, to know and see whether all the Company were of the same mind they had been; and That afterwards they met at Mrs. Mount∣joy's House, and there the Prisoner at the Bar was present, and consenting to the same thing: Thereupon Mr. Chernock went into France, and came back again, and said, The French King could not spare so much Force. Mr. Goodman gives the same Evidence that Mr. Porter had given: It's true, he was not at Mrs. Mountjoy's Tavern, but he tells you withal, He spoke with Mr. Chernock when he came back from France, and Chernock return'd him the same Answer that he did to Mr. Porter, That the French King could not spare so many Forces. This is the Evidence in short, Gentlemen, that is given against the Prisoner; and if this Evidence be true, then is he guilty of the Crime for which he is indicted.

Against these Witnesses they have produced, first, a Record of Convicti∣on against Mr. Goodman, and that was for hiring one Amadea to poyson the Duke of Grafton, and the Duke of Northumberland: They have produc'd the Record, whereby it appears, he was Convicted and Fined 1000 l. and was to find Security for the good behaviour during Life; and he was no lye in Prison till the Fine paid, and Security given: But it happens, in that very Record it appears there was Satisfaction acknowledg'd upon that even

the very next Term; and that gives a great deal of Suspicion to believe, that the Evidence that was given was not much credited; for, tho' the Coun∣cel for the Prisoner has said, that it was the Payment of the 1000 l. that was the Satisfaction; no, it is not so, it is a Satisfaction of the whole Judgment, for finding Security as well as the Fine. They say he was not able to pay the Fine; and there is nothing appears of the other parts of the Judgment being complied with, but the whole Judgment is set aside.

But all this does not make a Man no Legal Witness; if they thought this Conviction tended to set aside his Evidence, they would have produc'd it at another part of the Tryal, than where they did: That is, when Mr. Goodman was first call'd to be Sworn as a Witness, then they should have produc'd this Record, and said he had been no Witness: But they knew well enough that that was no Exception against the Legality of his Evidence, but tends only to his Credit, and nothing else. Now, tho' it be a black Crime to endeavour to poyson another, yet that does not totally destroy any Man's Credit; if it did, then the other Gentleman, Mr. Porter, has confess'd himself Guilty of a greater Crime than that for which Mr. Good∣man is Convicted by this Record; for, he owns himself one that was in that Design of Assassinating the King. And Mr. Goodman owns himself too Guilty of a greater Crime that what's objected to him, which is that of High Treason; and, I hope, if he may be believ'd, when he owns himself guilty of High Treason, which is a greater Crime than poysoning a pri∣vate Subject; or guilty of such a Design as the Assassination of the King, which Mr. Porter has charg'd himself with, and notwithstanding which they have not offer'd that as an Exception against Mr. Porter's Evidence, (for they very well know, his Evidence has been Receiv'd and Credited:) Mr. Goodman may be Credited, tho' Guilty of the Crime objected to him: And the constant Practise in all Tryals of this kind hath been, that it does not take away the Witnesses Evidence, however it affects his Credit, which in this Case is supported by the Concurrent Testimony of Mr. Porter. And so then, I say, we have two Legal Witnesses, (notwithstanding all the Ex∣ceptions) to prove Mr. Cook guilty of the Crime for which he is In∣dicted.

Then they go on further, and produce other Witnesses: First, they pro∣duce one Edwards, a Person that is Committed for High Treason himself, and under Suspicion of his being to be one of those that was to have a hand in the Assassination; but his Evidence goes no further, than that Mr. Goodman told him he was to be a Witness against Mr. Cook, and ei∣ther he the Witness, or Mr. Cook must suffer; and, That it was a foolish thing to be Hang'd. My Lord, there is nothing at all in this matter that takes away Mr. Goodman's Evidence: It is very plain Mr. Goodman had for∣feited his Life, and must do something to save it, and I think he could not do a better Service to entitle himself to the King's Mercy, than to disco∣ver those that were equally guilty with himself. 'Twas his Duty to have done it, if he had not been in Danger; and if he hath done no more than what was his Duty, I hope that is no Objection against his Testi∣mony.

They have produced likewise a Drawer of the Kings-head Tavern, one Crawford, and he says, he attended in this Room while this Company was there. But then he goes a little further than the Councel or the Prisoner would have had him; for they called him to prove, that Mr. Goodman was not there when my Lord of Ailesbury, my Lord Montgomery, and Mr. Cook were there. But when the Drawer comes, he knows nothing of Mr. Good∣man's being there at all: He says, Mr. Cook was there, but not Mr. Goodman;

and yet he does acknowledge, that Mr. Goodman might be there, and he not see him come up. He acknowledges he attended upon other Company as well as this; so that it is plain in the nature of the thing, and his own Con∣fession, that Goodman might be there. This cannot take off the positive Evidence of Mr. Goodman and Mr. Porter, who both swear, That Goodman was there.

But then they produce another Drawer, and that is one Huntley; and he gives the same Account, only indeed he says, He was there all the while they were at Dinner: But that is nothing, because it is acknowledg'd both by Mr. Porter and Mr. Goodman, That he was not there at Dinner-time, but he might be there after Dinner, and yet Huntly could not see him at Dinner: He tells you likewise, he pass'd up and down in the Room afterwards, and did not see Mr. Goodman there; but yet he might be there, and he not see him.

Then they produce the Master of the House, and he gives much the same Evi∣dence in effect which his Servants do, That he did not see Mr. Goodman there all the while; but he says something that is a little incredible; He can be positive that Mr. Goodman was not there while my Lord of Ailesbury was there, but he cannot be positive that he was not there afterwards. He tells you, he met my Lord of Ailesbury and my Lord Montgomery upon the middle of the Stairs coming down, and he is sure Mr. Goodman was not in the Room at that time. Now, is that possible that he could be sure of that, when he owns, (and cannot but own) That Mr. Goodman might go into the Room and he not see him? So that he has made a strain in his Evidence that it is very little to be Credited, which was not designed so much for the advantage of Mr. Cook as for the advantage of somebody else: And, in itself, it is almost an impossi∣ble thing that it should be true, by what he offers as the Reason of his Evi∣dence.

But then, Gentlemen, you are to consider, that all these three Witnesses, if they swear true, do falsifie not only Mr. Goodman, who swears, That he was there; but they likewise falsifie the Evidence of Mr. Porter, and for that Reason I ask'd Mr. Porter the Question, Whether he did not give the same Evidence against Sir John Friend? And if what he swears now be not true, neither was it true when Sir John Friend was Try'd, for he was the only Witness at that time against Sir John Friend, for this meeting; and therefore these mens Testimony tends to overthrow Both Witnesses as well as One: And I must tell you, that if Mr. Goodman be not a Legal Witness, because he has sworn a thing that is not true, then Mr. Porter is not a good Witness, who has sworn the same thing, viz. That Mr. Goodman was there; and then you ought to acquit the Prisoner, because there is no Witness against him at Law; for, there is the same Evidence against Mr. Porter that there is against Mr. Goodman as to this matter.

Then, Gentlemen, as for the Character of Mr. Cook, they say he is a good English Protestant, I hope he is so▪ but it is plain, that Religion does not vary the Case: 'Tis within the reach of every man's memory that is here, that the same things have fallen upon other Gentlemen that have had the same Character, particularly Sir John Friend and Sir William Parkyns, who both▪ said the same things, in the same place, That they were True Prote∣stants of the Church of England. But that is no manner of Evidence that will be of weight against Positive Oaths.

Now, Gentlemen, it is fit likewise you should reflect upon another thing: What is it that should engage Mr. Porter and Mr. Goodman, or invite ei∣ther of those two Gentlemen to give a False Evidence against the Prisoner at the Bar? It does not appear that there was any Injury done by him

to them, to provoke them, to it; so that it could be for nothing but for the sake of Truth.

It has been further said on the behalf of Mr. Cook, That he Abhorred the French, and any Invasion upon his Country, and the like: It is a mat∣ter that is easily said; and it has been said by others that have been in the same Place where he now stands; That they hated all Plots, and they might punish them if ever they caught them. But these are only Say∣ings, and nothing else. If there can be any Constructions made of the Evidence given by these two Witnesses, that does not directly prove the Indictment, then the Prisoner ought to be Acquitted: But if there can be no other Construction made, but only, That there was a plain Design to send Chernock into France, to King James, to perswade him to prevail with the French King, to come and Invade us with a Foreign Force: And if our Witnesses are Legal Witnesses, (as, I doubt not, my Lords the Judges will tell you they are; if there be no Exception to the Credit of Good∣men, but only that he was in such a Design of Poysoning the two Dukes, which is really no Objection of Discredit to his Testimony;) then, with Submission, I think there is no room left for you, Gentlemen of the Ju∣ry, to doubt, but that the Prisoner is as Guilty of this Crime laid to his charge, as any others that have been Try'd and Condemn'd for the same. And so, Gentlemen, I leave it to you.

L. C. J. Treby.

Mr. Conyers, and Mr. Cowper, will you say any thing to this matter.

Mr. Conyers and Mr. Cowper.

No, my Lord, we submit it entirely to your Lordships Direction; we have done on all sides, we think.

L. C. J. Treby.

Gentlemen of the Jury, the Prisoner at the Bar, Mr. Cook, stands indicted here for High Treason; there are laid in the Indictment two sorts of Treason; the one is, Compassing and Imagining the Death of the King; the other is, adhering to the King's Enemies. The Evidence to prove these Treasons seems to be joynt; for, as to that of Compassing and Imagining the King's Death, as well as to the other, the Overt Acts are meeting and consulting about the Treason, and then agreeing and resolv∣ing to invite and procure an Invasion from France, and to meet that In∣vasion with an Insurrection here. And the Evidence is apply'd entirely to prove these Acts.

Gentlemen, that these are proper Overt Acts of Compassing the King's Death, I need not inform you, the Law is very well known; and the Prisoner's own Councel do acknowledge, that these are sufficient Overt Acts of Compassing and Imagining the King's Death: So that all which they Defend him by is, the Improbability of the Testimony given against him.

Now, Gentlemen, you are to consider and weigh well the Evidence that has been given. By Law, it is true, as they observe, there must be Two Witnesses. Here is no defect of Number; that's acknowledg'd too, here are two Witnesses; but the Question is, whether here be two Witnesses that deserve Credit, and upon whose Testimony you can find that the Prisoner is Guilty. The Witnesses, Gentlemen, are Mr. Porter and Mr. Goodman.

First, For the matter of their Testimony, it is positive from them both; that you'll do well to observe. Mr. Porter tells, you, That 〈◊〉〈◊〉 May last, (which is now just a Twelve-month) there was a meeting of Eight Persons, that is, my Lord of Ailesbury, my Lord Montgomery, Sir John Fenwick, Sir William Parkyns, Sir John Friend, Mr. Chernock, Mr. Cook the Prisoner at the Bar, and the Witness himself Mr. Porter; and this was at

the Kings-head Tavern in Leaden-hall-street, and there these Eight dined, and this was in order to consult about an Invasion, together with an In∣surrection intended to be made for the Restoring of the late King. After Dinner comes in Mr. Goodman, he says, and then they pursued this Consul∣tation, and came to a Resolution, to send Mr. Chernock into France, and the Message was agreed upon which he should carry; and he was to go to the late King, and sollicite him to obtain 10000 Soldiers from the French King, whereof 8000 should be Foot, 1000 Horse, and 1000 Dragoons. These were to make up the 10000 men to invade this Kingdom. And they re∣solved also, when this Force should land, they should meet and assist this Invasion with a joynt Force, that should consist of 2000 Horse. And to Ac∣quaint and Assure him of this was the Message. But, he says, That Mr. Chernock was very cautious in it, and would not presently go upon this Errand, but he would have further Assurance that they were in earnest, and would make good what they did send him to propose, therefore he would have a second meeting; & a second meeting was had, & that was at Mrs. Mountjoy's Tavern, and there they did renew the same Resolution, and there were pre∣sent my Lord of Ailesbury, Sir William Parkyns, Sir John Fenwick, Sir John Friend, Mr. Chernock, the Prisoner at the Bar, and himself; he does not know or remember whether my Lord Montgomery, or Mr. Goodman was there. He says, Mr. Chernock did accordingly go into France, and he did return and bring back King James's Thanks to them, but their Desire could not be com∣ply'd with; and he had his Share of the Complements.

Now comes Mr. Goodman, & he says, That about the same time, viz. Mid-May, Mr. Porter acquainted him, there would be a meeting of some of K. James••s Friends, at this Tavern in Leaden-hall street. He says, That he did tell Mr. Porter, he doubted he should not be there at Dinner, but he would come as soon as he could after Dinner; and according to appointment, he did come after Dinner, and there was this Consultation and Resolution that Mr. Porter speaks of, and says, That Mr. Chernock afterwards told him, he had been in France with the late King, and brought back the same Answer that Mr. Porter speaks of; and he had the Honour of Thanks from the late King too.

Gentlemen, I must observe one thing to you, which does go very much towards the confirming what these Witnesses say, and that is the Agreement in their Testimonies, tho they were examin'd Apart at the Desire of the Pri∣soner: You will find they agree in these several Circumstances, in the Time, that it was this time twelve-months; in the Place, that it was at this Tavern; in the Number of Persons that were there, which was Eight before Mr. Good∣man came in; in the number of Horse, Foot, and Dragoons that were to be brought from France, and in those Horse that were to meet them here; and besides, in those words of Discourse upon the Consultation and the Resolu∣tion. And there is one Circumstance more in which they do agree, and which is very particular; That when they came to deliver their Consent to this Message that Mr. Chernock was to carry, the rest sate, and Mr. Cook the Pri∣soner did kneel upon the Chair, and lean'd upon the Table. And this both of them do agree in. And after all the many Questions ask'd in their sepa∣rate examination, I do not find they disagree in any Part of their Evidence. So that, Gentlemen, there can remain no Question now, but Whether these two Witnesses are men of Credit; or, whether there has been opposed to them any such Evidence as will make you believe, that (if not both) at least one of them has forsworn himself. They do produce nothing against Mr. Porter, whatsoever may have been produc'd at former Tryals against his Credit: Perhaps what has been before, has satisfied the Objectors,

there is nothing appears against his Credit; but he is not only a Competent but a very clear, good, credible, and undoubted Witness.

But against Mr. Goodman they offer several things which they say amount to a violent Presumption, that he is not to be look'd upon as a credible Wit∣ness: And first, they produce a Record of a Conviction upon an Informa∣tion against him, for attempting to poison two Noble Dukes: This he was convicted of, and fin'd 1000 l. and ordered to find Sureties for his good Behaviour during his Life. But, to this it is answered, that it ap∣pears in the same Record, that Satisfaction was acknowledged of the 1000 l. and all the rest of the Judgment the very next Term, and he was forthwith discharged, and that without paying the Mony, which ('twas observ'd) the Prisoner's Counsel said Mr. Goodman was not able to pay at that time, no more than he could 20000 l. and thereupon the King's Counsel say, that the Go∣vernment was convinc'd that he was wrong'd by a causeless Prosecution, and the Evidence against him was found not to be credible. And besides, Mr. Goodman stands pardoned by several Acts of Pardons, as well as other Subjects.

Then they produce one Edwards, who is a Prisoner here, and committed for Suspicion of High Treason, and for Treasonable Practices: He is, no doubt of it, a Witness for all that: For that is but an Accusation upon him, and does not take away his Credit. He tells you of a Discourse that he had with Mr. Goodman, and that Goodman ask'd him when the Prisoner was to be try'd; and he told him he wou'd be try'd such a Day; and when it was ask'd what it was for, it was answer'd, not for the Assassination, but for sending Mr. Chernock into France? He ask'd then who were the Witnesses against him? Mr. Goodman said, Mr. Porter and himself. And further said, that he under∣stood that Mr. Cook had sworn against him (though he would give an Ac∣count of no body else) and had no Pardon, and either he must hang, or him∣self. And then he talk'd lightly of the Business of hanging, and said it was a foolish thing to be hang'd, for all that People wou'd say, was, that such an one hang'd handsomly, or dyed bravely. This indeed is a sort of Discourse as if Mr. Goodman did apprehend himself in Danger from Mr. Cook's Evidence; and yet I cannot see that it does at all falsifie the Evidence of Mr. Goodman: He may be a true Witness, and yet he might say he was to give Evidence against Mr. Cook, and it was in Mr. Cook's Power to give Evidence against him, and that truly; and if both were in the Guilt, they were in Danger of one another. But for a further Answer, the King's Counsel have produced Mr. De-la-rue, who says, that he knew Mr. Edwards, and that he was a Scotch Man, and reputed Chaplain to the Viscount of Dundee, that he went formerly by the Name of Dowglas, and by that Name he was set down and described in the List that Mr. Chernock sent to Captain Porter; and to that Name he answer'd in the Press-yard late∣ly. Now it is certain, that Mr. Chernock's putting of his Name in that List, is no Evidence of his being guilty in Mr. Chernock's Treason. But his going by two Names doth justly lay him under some Suspicion. But the Evidence that the Prisoner seems to rely upon most, is what Evidence has been pro∣duc'd against Mr. Goodman in that Point of Fact, by the Master and the two Drawers; the first of the Drawer's Name was Crawford, and he does tell you, that about 12 Months ago there was this Company at Dinner there: My Lord of Aylesbury, my Lord Montgomery, Sir John Friend, Sir John Fenwick, Sir William Parkyns, Captain Porter, Mr. Chernock, and the Prisoner, though he did not then know his Name, or the Name of one or two more of them. I observe by the way, that his Testimony so far does verifie theirs, that there were eight of them there, but he says he did not see Mr. Goodman there, nor any but those that dined there. And my Lord of Aylesbury went away, as he thinks, about four a Clock. He cannot say that the Prisoner was there, or was gone at that time before Mr. Goodman came in; for he did not see Mr.

Goodman there at all, he was not in the Room all the time, but he was to and fro attending till my Lord of Aylesbury and my Lord Montgomery went away in a Coach that was called, and when they were gone, the rest of the Com∣pany staid there a good while; being urged to tell how long, at last he said it was dark, and that agrees with Mr. Porter, who says, it was about nine a-Clock when they went away. He says he was there once or twice after my Lord of Aylesbury went away, but he never saw Mr. Goodman that he remembers at all, till last Saturday, in all his Life. As to this the King's Counsel say, that it is on∣ly a negative Evidence, and in which a Man cannot be absolutely positive, but can only speak according to his Observation and Memory, which might not be perfect, and Mr. Goodman might be there in the mean time of his going in and out: That is possible; and so it must be left to you to consider of it.

Then there is Huntly the other Drawer, and he says my Lord of Aylesbury went away about that time, and that he did not see Mr. Goodman there at all, nor ever in his Life till now; neither does he remember that any body came to them after Dinner, and if any fresh Man had then come in, he thinks he should (going often in to them) have known him; and says, that he attend∣ed this Company only: And he had seen Sir John Friend and Sir William Par∣kyns there before.

Then Mr. Cock, the Master of the House was produced, and he names all the eight Persons that did dine there, and so far he confirms the King's Evi∣dence: He thinks that my Lord of Aylesbury and my Lord Montgomery went away privately (as it seems they had come) in a Hackney Coach, and that it was about 4 a-Clock; and he says, he did not see Mr. Goodman there, and he does not know that he ever saw him till now: But when he was cross exa∣mined by the King's Counsel, he does acknowledge that he might possibly come in after Dinner, and before my Lord of Aylesbury went away, and he not see him, because he was not there all the time; he says Sir John Friend used to dine at his House, and came to his House once a Week; and he had seen some of the rest, but they did not frequent his House as Sir John Friend did: He says, the Company din'd about 2 a-Clock, and the last of them staid till about 8 or 9, and that the Door was shut as is usual when Company is in a Room, but no body was forbid to come there.

But to establish the Credit of the Evidence on the King's part, they did pro∣duce Mr. Goodman and Mr. Porter again: Mr. Goodman does acknow∣ledge so far to be true, that my Lord of Aylesbury went away first; but says, that himself was not wholly a Stranger to this House, for he had dined there four or five times with Sir John Friend, and particularly one time, he being sick, and asking for some Brandy, the Master of the House said he would help him to some of the best in England, and Mr. Goodman would have bought some of him. But the Master seems not to own that, and says, he does not remember any thing of it.

But then comes Mr. Porter again, and he says positively, that Mr. Goodman was there, and that he did speak with the Company, and complemented my Lord of Aylesbury when he went away, and went part of the way towards the Stairs with him; and he does well remember it by this Token, that when Mr. Porter was told Mr. Goodman was below, he mentioned him in the Company as a trusty Man, that was fit for the Conversation; and then Mr. Porter went and fetch't him up, and Mr. Goodman was there near two Hours, and they discours'd all this matter in that time in the Presence of the Prisoner and the rest; and he says it was about six a-Clock before my Lord of Aylesbury and my Lord Mont∣gomery went away, and then there was Opportunity enough for this Discourse, and Consult that they speak of.

The Prisoner has offered another sort of Evidence: First, the Confidence of his own Innocence, that he was abroad three Weeks after this Conspiracy

was discovered; and they have produced Mr. Treganna, Mr. Peachy, and Mr. Nichols, who prove that he never absconded, but was abroad and appeared openly (for three Weeks after) till such time as he was taken. This the King's Counsel say is no proof that he is not Guilty, and their Evidence un∣true. They say he might have a Confidence, and the rather because he is not charged with the Assassination; for, at that time these Witnesses speak of nothing was discovered and publick but the Assassination; for it was before Sir John Friend's Trial; and then was the great Discovery of the Secret of the Invasion.

Then he shews further as to his Conversation, that he is a Man of a very sober Life, never was known to Swear, that he Drinks but little, and is a Godly Man, and often says his Prayers. As to that, the King's Counsel on the other side tell you, that has been pretended to by other People too; and the Question is not about Religion, but this Fact that you are now to try. Whether he be so Religious or no as he pretends, or whether he be Sincere in his Devotion, that is not so much the matter now, but the Question is, whether he has offended in this Kind as he stands Accused. They produce a Gentleman, one Mr. Hammond, and he says that he is a very Consciencious Man, and particularly is a great Lover of his Country; and he has often heard him declare a Detestation of an Invasion by a French Force, and wish Success to the Fleet; but that which he remembers chiefly, was about the time of the Discovery of this Plot. The King's Counsel answer to this, that a man may use such kind of Expressions, perhaps to Cover his Guilt; and in the Reply to Sir Barth. Showers Observations it was taken notice of by Mr. Solicitor, (what we all cannot but remember) that the like Evidence was given as to Sir John Friend, that he did detest an Invasion, and was present at the Common Prayer when King William was pray'd for, and declared against Plots; and that if they catched him in the Corn they might put him in the Pound. These things a man might say, and it is the lightest Evidence that can be given, being Discourses out of Mens own mouths, who will never proclaim their own Guilt; and therefore it is the weakest Defence that can be offered. But Gentlemen, you are to consider the other Evidence that has been produc'd by the Prisoner, given by several Witnesses, and who are upon their Oaths now as well as the King's Witnesses. And his Counsel say their Witnesses, but particularly the three upon whom they chiefly rely, have no Objection made out against them; and no man's Testimony ought to be Presumed to be false. And it must be taken notice of, that they can speak only according to their Belief, grounded on their Observation and Memory, that they did not so far as they observed or remember, see Mr. Goodman there, as 'twas most probable they should if he had been. But 'tis possible they might overlook or forget; the rather for that they were not of the Company, but in and out, up and down; and Mr. Goodman was not there at Dinner when their Attendance was fixt and constant.

It ought to be considered also, that here are several Circumstances, some of which seem very pregnant. It is agreed on all hands, that the Prisoner Dined there with those other seven persons, concerning Four of whom we must conclude nothing; but concerning three of them we in this Court may take notice, they are Attainted of High Treason, and so it is evident that the Prisoner was for a long time a Companion of three Traytors, and had a Conversation with them. I do not find that he had any Occasion to be there; nor any of the rest of the Company. Concerning my Lord of Aylesbury, indeed it is said he proposed to treat about a Hogshead of White Wine. But that seems to be casual, and not the end of his coming and Dining with this Company there. But, be that how it will, that relates to his Lordship alone. But, for the others, I do not find they do pretend any Occasion of meeting there; and therefore

it leaves it the more suspicious: And 'tis the more so, because it was managed so privately and cautelously. They were not attended according to their Qualities. The Lords went away together in a Hackney-Coach that was called, as they had come thither in another. The rest thought fit to stay there till it was dark; and as soon as it was so, went away. There was some ex∣traordinary Cause for all this. It did import the Prisoner to shew, that it was for some good Cause and Purpose.

And further, it is observable that this House was a place which, as the Master says, none of this Company did use to resort to, except Sir John Friend; which makes it probable (this being a House that Sir John Friend frequented and none of the others) that He bespoke this place, and brought the rest thi∣ther: And if it were so, that makes it more probable that there was such a Treason there to be hatch'd, as is evidenced by the King's Witnesses; for you may remember, and it appears by the Record in this Court, that Sir John Friend was indicted and attainted (not for the Assassination, but) for the Treason for which the Prisoner is now a trying, an Invasion that was to be supported with an Insurrection. Now if Sir John Friend was chiefly acquaint∣ed with this House, and brought this Company together, it is very probable it was about this business which Sir J. Friend was so concerned in. And that he is Attainted for it, appears upon the Record before us; which should be read, but that the Prisoners Counsel admit it, and are so far satisfied in it, that they won't Arraign the Verdict; nay, they did acknowledge that there was a Plot; and there was no doubt of it, there was such a Plot.

Now then Gentlemen, here it is certainly proved by these two Witnesses, (and not gainsaid by the Prisoners own Witnesses,) that there was such a Meet∣ing, and that the Prisoner was there; and they both have positively Sworn that this Treason was committed there. You have heard what has been objected to their Credit; they have delivered their Testimony upon their Oaths; and so, Gentlemen, are you upon your Oaths: If you are satisfied, and can take it upon your Consciences that these two Witnesses are, or any one of them is, forsworn (if such distinction can possibly be made in this case) then you are to acquit the Prisoner; but if you are satisfied, and think they have sworn true, you are to find him Guilty.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

Nay, if one be forsworn both are; for the Evidence is entirely in all parts the same; and if Mr. Goodman be perjured, Mr. Porter is so too.

Sir B. Shower.

Forsworn and Perjured are hard words; we only say mi∣staken.

Mr. J. Rokeby.

Well, that Objection goes to one as well as t'other.

L. C. J. Treby.

It must be so, since they speak of the same joint matter, viz. their being together in Company. If Mr. Porter says true when he swears that Mr. Goodman was there with him and the rest, Mr. Goodman must say true when he swears that he was there with Mr. Porter and the rest. There was one thing that I forgot: Sir B. Shower observed, that it might be an Invention of Captain Porter, because he fixeth it in point of time to the Month of May, that he does not say it was in April; for that then it would be within the Par∣don, which extends to April 29. last year; nor would he lay it in June, for then he was in Newgate, and others of them were disperst by reason of a Riot com∣mitted in Drury-lane; and so there was no Month left but May: And this Sir B. Shower alledges, was a piece of Skill and Contrivance. But, really, this is a piece of Ingenuity in himself. For, besides that the King's Witnesses affirm positively that it was in May, and remember it by a certain token, viz. That it was within a very few days after the King went beyond Sea, one or two of the Prisoner's Witnesses (Crawford I am sure) did say that this Meet∣ing was this time twelve-month, and you know we are now near mid-May.

Mr. Serjeant Darnall.

If you believe our Drawers for part, you must be∣lieve them for all.

Mr. Att. Gen.

No, not so: My Lord speaks only where they concur with our Evidence. It were strange to expect we should disbelieve or doubt what the Witnesses on both sides affirm to be true: But, I do not think it would be to the Advantage of the Prisoner, if what his Counsel proposeth were agreed to, viz. that the Drawers (and their Master too) should be believed for All they say, provided equally that the King's Witnesses should, in like manner, be believ'd for what they say. For, the main thing controverted is, whether Mr. Goodman were at this Meeting. These Witnesses for the Prisoner say, they did not see him there; at least they do not remember it. Mr. Porter and Mr. Goodman himself say, he was there. Now, these things agreed, and ad∣mitted, would make a very consistent clear Evidence, that Mr. Goodman was there, though the Master and Drawers did not observe, or do not remember his being there.

Then an Officer was sworn to keep the Jury, who withdrew to consider of their Verdict, and about three quarters of an Hour after they returned into Court.

Cl. of Arr.

Gentlemen, answer to your Names: Henry Sherbrook.

Mr. Sherbrook.

Here: And so of the rest, &c.

Cl. of Arr.

Are you all agreed of your Verdict?

Jury.

Yes.

Cl. of Arr.

Who shall say for you?

Jury.

Our Foreman.

Cl. of Arr.

Set Peter Cook to the Bar

(which was done)

Peter Cook hold up thy Hand

(which he did)

Look upon the Prisoner, how say you, is he guil∣ty of the High Treason whereof he stands Indicted, or not guilty?

Foreman.

Guilty.

Cl. of Arr.

What Goods or Chattels, Lands or Tenements had he at the time of the Treason committed, or at any time since?

Foreman.

None to our Knowledge.

Cl. of Arr.

Then hearken to your Verdict as the Court has recorded it: You say that Peter Cook is guilty of the High Treason whereof he stands indict∣ed, but that he had no Goods or Chattels, Lands or Tenements at the time of the High Treason committed, or at any time since to your Knowledge, and so you say all.

Jury.

Yes.

Cl. of Arr.

Gentlemen, the Court dismisses you, and thanks you for your Service.

Then the Court adjourned till 5 a-Clock in the Evening.

Post Meridiem.

About six a-Clock, the Court being, by Proclamation, Resum'd, the Pri∣soner convicted was brought to the Bar, in order to Judgment.

Cl. of Arr.

Peter Cook, hold up thy Hand (which he did) thou stand'st con∣victed of High Treason, for compassing and imagining the Death of his Majesty King William the Third, and for adhering to the King's Enemies; what canst thou say for thy self, why the Court should not give thee Judgment to dye ac∣cording to the Law?

Cook.

My Lord Mayor, my Eyes are very bad, therefore I desire your Lord∣ship would be pleased to take this Paper, and that it may be read.

Cl. of Arr.

Have you any thing to say in Arrest of Judgment?

Cook.

I desire my Paper may be read.

[It was handed up to the Court, and then delivered down to Mr. Att. General and the King's Counsel, but not openly read.]

Mr. Recorder.

Mr. Cook, the Court have read your Paper you sent up, and have communicated it to the King's Counsel; if you have any thing to move in Arrest of Judgment, this is your time, and we will hear you, but as for any Representation of your Case to any others, that must be considered of afterwards, you are now called to your Judgment.

Cook.

I did not know that I might offer any thing afterwards, but if your Lordships think fit to communicate that to my Lords Justices, I submit it to you.

Mr. Recorder.

Mr. Cook, there is nothing appears upon this Paper that is matter of Law, and so not serviceable to you now, and therefore what you desire in it, the Court will consider of afterwards.

Cook.

I do not understand the Law, my Lord, but I have heard the Court ought to be of Counsel for the Prisoner, and I desire I may not suffer by my Ignorance.

Mr. Recorder.

I declare it, for my part, I know nothing that you can have any Advantage of in Arrest of Judgment; if I did, you should not lose the Be∣nefit of it, and you have had your Counsel assigned, who have pleaded for you without restraint; and if there had been any matter of Law that would have availed you in Arrest of Judgment, no doubt, they would have laid hold of that Advantage for you.

Cook.

I can't tell, my Lord, what is matter of Law.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Your Lordship observes, they took all the Objections that they could to the Indictment, but there was none that they could fix.

Cl. of Arr.

Then Cryer make Proclamation.

(Which was done on both sides of the Court.)

Cryer.

Oyez, All manner of Persons are commanded to keep silence while Judgment is in giving, upon pain of Imprisonment.

Cook.

My Lord, may I have my Paper again?

Mr. Recorder.

If you think it may be of any Service to you to leave it with the Court, you may do so; or if you desire it, you shall have it again.

Cook.

I desire your Lordship to keep it.

Mr. Recorder.

I will receive it, and it shall not be buryed, I assure you.

Cook.

I don't hear what the Court says.

Mr. Recorder.

You say you did not hear what was said to you: If you desire to have your Paper again, you shall have it, but if you desire to have it com∣municated above, the Court will consider it, and take care of that too.

Cook.

I desire your Lordship wou'd do it.

Then the Recorder proceeded to give Judgment thus.

Mr. Cook, I think it useful to the publick, and also at this time to you, to observe, that the Reign of the late King James, was throughout, one intire Design and Project form'd in Conjunction with the French King, totally to sub∣vert our Religion, Laws, and Liberties, which grew so apparent to the Sub∣jects of these Nations, in so many Instances of fatal Consequence, manag'd in such a Method, and advanc'd so far, that the People of these Kingdoms, of all Qualities, Ranks, and Degrees, did find it absolutely necessary for the Pre∣servation of themselves and the neighbour Nations now in Alliance with us, to pray in Aid of the then Prince of Orange, as a Person, not only nearly allied to this Crown; but also intirely in the Interest of these Kingdoms, and those neighbouring Princes, and Countries that lay exposed to the Violence and am∣bitious Insults of France. And the Love which that noble Prince did bear, not only to us, but to our Neighbours also, disposed him to embrace that In∣vitation, upon whose Arrival here, that Predecessor, from Motives that were invisible, declin'd the Kingdom and the Government; and left the People to

themselves; whereupon his present Majesty was necessarily and rightfully placed upon that Throne he so well deserv'd: And this is now that King, for whose Preservation all good People have associated, and spare neither Lives nor Treasure to support and to continue in the Government; and this is that King whom you have Traiterously conspired, not only to dethrone, but also to destroy; and this is that People that you would have to swim in Blood, and lose their Religion, Liberty, and Property. These Matters need a Histo∣ry to relate at large, I only touch them shortly, to move good Men to re∣joyce in their Deliverance, and to move you seriously to reflect upon the Hei∣nousness of your Crime.

Mr. Cook, you are an English Man, and must needs know, that in this Place we frequently condemn to Death Clippers, Coiners, Thieves and Robbers, and other such like Criminals, and that justly and necessarily too, for the Pre∣servation of the Innocent, and for the common Good. Of what Condemna∣tion must you, and such as you, be worthy then, who have so horridly endea∣vour'd and design'd the fatal Ruin and Destruction of your own native Coun∣try, and to render your fellow Subjects a miserable Prey, and at the best to become Slaves and Vassals to a foreign Prince?

Let me also mind you, That nothing is more sure, than that after this, you must receive a Judgment in another World; and if that pass against you too, that Sentence will be most terrible, and your Sufferings without End: And therefore I do advise you to imploy the few Days you have yet to live, in Preparation for your future Happiness, which cannot be duly done without a full Confession of this, as well as other Crimes you have been guilty of; I therefore charge it to you, as your Duty, and leave it with you at your ut∣most Peril, that you honestly and faithfully discover all you know of this in∣human and traiterous Conspiracy, and all the Persons that you do know to be guilty of it: This will be the greatest Service you can do in this World, and will be the best Preparatory Step that you can take towards a better. And,

Sir, there now remains no more for me to say, but to pronounce that Sen∣tence on you which the Law directs. And that is this,

THat you, Peter Cook, be taken hence to the Place from whence you came; and thence be drawn upon a Hurdle to the Place of Execution, where you are to be hang'd by the Neck, and cut down before you be dead; that your Bowels be ta∣ken out, and your Privy Members cut from your Body, and both burnt in your Sight▪ That your Head be cut off, and your Body divided into four Quarters, which Head and Quarters are to be at the King's Disposal; and God Allmighty have Mercy up∣on your Soul.

Cook.

I beg, if your Lordship please, that I may have my Relations and Friends come to see me, and some Divines, the better to prepare me for an∣other World.

Mr. Recorder.

Mr. Cook, if you'll give the Names of those that you would have come to you, to the Officer, Care shall be taken in it; and you will not be de∣nyed any reasonable Helps that may be had for your Preparation for Eternity.

Mr. Att. Gen.

It is not fit he should be deny'd any reasonable Help; but in the mean time there is reason for the Government to be cautious, upon the ac∣count of what has notoriously past in the Case of some others.

Mr. Recorder,

If he give in the Names, it will be considered of, and Care ta∣ken that nothing be done, but what is reasonable, and safe.

Then the Prisoner was taken from the Bar, and the Court proceeded to what was remaining of the Business of the Sessions.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Rookwood's Tryal 4. 13.