expression; but as for any thing of dishonesty, there is nothing against Mr. Bolron. He was in debt, it is true, but what he had lay at stake for the payment of it, and as far as it would go sir Thomas might take it; but that for malice he should come to swear against him, there is nothing clearly made out. One witness says, indeed, that he should say, Does sir T. Gascoigne intend to sue me, then I will do what I did not intend to do. Whether that be a speech of malice or no, or rather does confirm the truth of his evidence, is left to your con sideration: It shews rather, there was something that he had in his power to do before any prosecution from sir T. Gascoigne, or any occasion of his malice against him; it hath not the necessary import of a malicious speech, that he did intend not to do such a thing, and because he was sued did do it; that therefore is only truth, and no malice. For the other matter that is said against him, that he should endeavour to suborn his wife to swear falsely, that was by no means fully proved, but rather that matter hath been sufficiently cleared; that though she said she knew nothing, yet he would have her go, though she said nothing; and you hear what the evidence hath been for Mr. Bolron, that he never did press her to swear falsely, nor threaten her if she would not, but only desired her to declare her knowledge if she knew any thing, the truth, and nothing but the truth. These are all the objections made against the credit of the witnesses; and I think if their credit do stand, you cannot have a clearer evidence to convict any one than bath been given you to day; but that we leave to you, and submit these objections, whether they have any weight in them, and whether they have not been fully answered. king: and that he heard sir Thomas Gascoigne himself declare that it was a meritorious act to kill the king; and that as before he had the oath of secrecy given him by Rushton, so he did declare (which Mowbray standing at the door heard) that he would never swerve from the oath, but he would assist to the utmost of his power; and they that were with him said, they would stand by it with their lives and fortunes; and when my lady Tempest understood he was there, and was jealous of him, she bid him go down, and entertain the guests below stairs. So here is an evidence from two witnesses as full as can be in any case, that sir T. Gascoigne was privy to the conspiracy, and himself partaker of it, to kill the king. All that hath been said against them, is to vilify their reputation. As to Mowbray I hear but little, only there are two witnesses that touch him; and indeed if these witnesses were to be believed, they say a great deal; that is, they were in an alehouse together, and beard them conspire to take away the life of sir T. Gascoigne. Indeed Mowbray said, for sir T. Gascoigne, I know nothing but that he is a very honest gentleman, but for my lady Tempest, if I could hang her I would: that they should hear them contrive this together, and conspire how they should take away the lives of this gentleman, and the others. Indeed, if these men say true, it is a great matter to take off the credit of testimony; but you heard, gentlemen, how they did vary; for the one said, as I apprehended, at first he was in the room, afterwards he was below stairs. Ask the one, could you hear them? Yes. Could you see them? No; said the other, Yes. So that they were not well provided, as to that matter, nor had they consulted that point well, where they should agree to stand to overhear the matter. Now if that be likely, they should in the presence of two persons whom they did not know, and one Just. Jones. Gentlemen, you of the Jury: of them they never saw, but in the court, de- The prisoner at the bar stands indicted for clare and discourse of such a matter as this for high treason, and for high treason of the highest the taking away the life of sir T. Gascoigne, nature, for conspiring to take away the life of then we have nothing to say to them, we must the king, and for endeavouring to change the leave the credit of that to you; you will ob-religion, the Protestant religion into Popery; serve their variety in the story, and the impro- that is, contriving to extirpate the religion of bability of the thing. But then for Mr. Bolron, Protestantism here, and introduce Popery inthe evidence against him is, that he is a very stead of it; and certainly greater crimes than dishonest man, and that this is all out of malice these no man can be accused of. There have to sir T. Gascoigne, because he would sue him been produced, on the behalf of the king, two upon his bonds. You observe how he does witnesses, Mr. Bolron and Mr. Mowbray, both behave himself under that prosecution; all that of them servants to sir T. Gascoigne the priso he hath he is willing to part with for payment ner, and therefore might very possibly and proof his debt; he makes over his estate for satis-bably enough be privy to all they have said and faction and security, and does as much as an honest man can do, all be had shall lie at stake: and as for sir T. Gascoigne himself, he hath no such opinion of him in point of dishonesty, for be declared he lived in his service without exception, and said before the council, he knew nothing of dishonesty by him, but only this information, and now he found him to be (what he always thought) a great fool. Now whether he thought him a fool for telling this story, or what else, you may explain the meaning of his Serj. Maynard. And our evidence is given in all upon oath, and their's is not. testified in this case. It does appear by them both, that sir T. Gascoigne was a very early man in the Plot, if they say true. We heard nothing of it till the long vacation, 1678; but it seems sir T. Gascoigne was a plotter and conspirator in the year 1675 or 1676. And that he might be able to do this somewhat more safely, he contrives how he might convey away his estate to prevent the forfeiture; and he makes an assurance of it to sir William Ingleby, colourably, as the witnesses swear, for 1,000l. And it does appear likewise, as to the introduction of the Popish religion here, they began to settle a nunnery, and it was fit to do so against England should be converted; first, in such a place: but if it happened England were converted, then to be removed to another place. There was at this nunnery appointed an abbess, an assistant and several nuns; and sir T. Gascoigne so well knew of this, that one of them that was appointed to be a nun, at the time of her taking horse, he said to her, 'There goes an old maid and a young nun.' And there are letters come from that very nunnery, and from the priest that was appointed to attend them as confessor, which have been read to you. And there is another preparation thought necessary to introduce this Plot, and that is, That all Papists might be seduced into an opinion that it was a dangerous thing to take the oath of allegiance, and that it was a damnable sin. For this purpose letters came from the doctors at Sorbonne, and they determine it to be so, lest any man of that religion should be so good a subject as to profess obedience to the king in temporals. Then the Plot goes on between sir Miles Stapleton, sir Francis Hungatt, sir Charles Vavasor, sir T. Gascoigne, Mr. Gascoigne, Middleton, Rushton, my lady Tempest, and a great company more; all met together and consulting in sir T. Gascoigne's house, in his great room, his old dining-room, to this purpose, not only to bring in their religion, but kill the king expressly (so says the witness). I think they had often talked of it before the witness in the priest's chamber; for he being then a Papist was privy to his master's design, and the rest of the confederates for killing the king, which was the only thing they desired to effect, as the best way to bring in their religion; and there was great reason to do it, they said too, for the king had not kept his word with them when he was in his exile; for they said, he had promised if he was restored to his kingdoms, he would restore the Popish religion; but now he was returned and had broke his promise and nothing more was to be done, the l'ope having declared him an heretic, but to destroy him; and this was that which was agreed among them. The 30th of May last, after divers other consults had about it, the priest Rushton being at sir T. Gascoigne's house, Bolron is desired to go into the gallery, and there presently comes in Rushton, sir Thomas's priest; Bolron acquaints him that he had been at the sessions, and taken the oath of allegiance. As soon as ever he heard it, he cries out, He had committed a damnable sin, he must of necessity renounce it, and repent of it, and he could give him a pardon, for he had an extraordinary power, more authority than others, he could give him absolution if he did repent of it, and that no Catholic must by any means take the oath. A while after they had ■ discourse concerning killing the king; and the witness says indeed, he was not actually in the room, for he says he stood at the door, and beard all the discourse, till at last the lady Tempest, one of the conspirators, taking notice of his being there, sent him down stairs. Justice Pemberton. That is Mowbray. Mr. Mowbray. I was called into the room, and then sent down. Justice Jones. It is true, brother, that was Mowbray: but as to Bolron's discourse with Rushton; when sir T. Gascoigne, who was not in the house at the time Bolron was with Rushton, but had given a charge he should not go before he spoke with him: when he did come home and spoke with him, he takes upon him to go on with the discourse concerning the Plot, and he swears positively that he offered he would give him 1,000l. and this he swears he should have paid him in London. This is expressly the testimony of Bolron. Now what says Mowbray? He tells you (though that is but introduction to make his evidence more probable) that there was great resort of priests to the prisoner's house. He tells you of the discourse and consultation the priests had in the house, and that it was expressly and precisely for killing the king. He tells you, that he did stand at the door and heard it, as I observed before; and he tells you too, which hath not been observed, that at that time there was produced a list of four or five hundred persons that had engaged in the design of killing the king: he did see the list, he did see sir T. Gascoigne's hand, which he very well knew and was acquainted with, and which might very well be, being his servant. So that here is not only a discourse and agreement by paroll, that he should be in the conspiracy; but if you believe him, he says, that here is actually the hand of sir Thomas to the engagement to do the villainy; and truly they that were of that persuasion at that time, might easily be induced to it. For it was agreed amongst them, that they should have a plenary indulgence of 10,000 years, and it was a meritorious act; and though sir Thomas perhaps was not so ready to contribute in all things, yet hearing of the meritoriousness of the act, and withal that he should be canonized for a saint for this piece of piety, he certainly might readily consent to it. Mr. Mowbray indeed was asked, Why he did not discover it sooner? He tells you why, He was in fear of the Papists; he was threatened; and very like he might be possessed with fear, and so might a man of greater constancy till the business was discovered; and therefore he did not talk of it in the country, but came up here, where it was more safe to discover it, and hath been here ever since. Besides this testimony of these witnesses, gentlemen, there are some papers produced, some that mention money that hatli been conveyed by sir T. Gascoigne, in confirmation of the testimony of Bolron the first witness, who does swear that he heard sir Thomas say he would send 3,000l. to the Jesuits to go on and prosecute this Plot; and afterwards he did hear him say, he had sent the 3,000l. that he had promised. Now it does appear by sir Thomas's almanack, that he had sent several sums; his receiver Phiswick did speak of 6,000l. and he himself did give a touch towards it. Indeed Phiswick was a receiver for sir Thomas, and likewise for his son, and for the lady Tempest; but it is impossible, if they had sent all the money that ever they had; and considering too that the lady Tempest, as appears by the witnesses, lived in the country, that it could have amounted to near that sum of money; for she had 300l. a year, and the eldest son had but 4001. a year, how then could 6,000l. be returned for them in four years time? It is true, there is some answer given as to that 9001. by that witness Hobart, who says there was a suit, and 100l. a year decreed to be paid to Mrs. Appleby, sir Thomas's niece, for so many years, and he to take care of sending that to her and though that was but 100l. a year, yet there was a decree, or some order, to pay the arrears with the other money, which made it up 9001. : The evidence for the king against the prisoner is but two witnesses, but they as positive and express as possibly can be. What then is said by the prisoner, or the witnesses, in his defence? There is one, that is Shippon, that gives some testimony against the very evidence, and the possibility of it to be true in one part of it: for Bolron, he tells you, that the 30th of May was the time when there was that consult held at sir T. Gascoigne's in the gallery with the -priest, that he staid there till night, and that then sir Thomas talked with him, and made this proffer to him for the murder and destruction of the king. Here comes a witness, Shippon, and tells you, that that very 30th of May, Bolron was at his house at 2 o'clock, and staid an hour or two after sunset. If that were true that he were there all that time, it is not then true that he speaks of about sir T. Gascoigne; and it was impossible that he should be at the consult at that time when he says he was there, and afterwards spoke to sir T. Gascoigne. Now gentlemen, you have the king's witness upon his oath; he that testifies against him is barely upon his word, and he is a Papist too, for that he was asked, and he did confess himself so. I do not say that a Papist is no witness, a Papist is a witness, and he is a witness in a Papist cause, and for a Papist; but I must tell you, there is less credit to be given to a Papist in a cause of this nature, who can easily believe they may have indulgences and pardons enough for saving one from the gallows who is to be canonized for a Saint if the plot take effect. He hath only affirmed it who is a Papist, the other who is a Protestant swears what his evidence is. Mr. Babbington, who was the first witness examined for the prisoner, he tells you there had been some debates and differences about rent and money that was owing by Bolron to the prisoner. He laboured and interceded often on his behalf; but at length not being able to prevail that he should not be sued, the witness swears, I will then do that which I did not intend to do. What he meant by it is doubtful, and it is an ambiguous speech; but to interpret it that he would swear falsely to take away a man's life, and so commit both murder and perjury, is hard to infer and conclude from such doubtful words. There are some witnesses that tell you, that is, Moor and others, that Bolron did say and swear that sir T. Gascoigne was never concerned in the plot: that might very well be, especially if you take the time when he did say this, he was a Papist a great while after sir Thomas had engaged himself in the plot; and while he was so, it is not unlike he would venture an oath to save any of the same persuasion and religion he himself was of. But whatsoever he said, it was not judicially, he was not bound to discover to him be spoke to; he is now upon his oath, and you have heard what an express testimony he gives. As to what is said concerning his wife, that he should endeavour to persuade her, contrary to her knowledge, to give testimony against sir T. Gascoigne, and therefore he is not to be believed here upon his own oath, who would have his wife forswear herself to fortify him; there is no such thing; and it does appear by the evidence of those that are sworn, that he was earnest, and would have his wife go and testify her knowledge; but did not infuse or intimate any thing to her she should say, whether she did know it or no: And to assure you that, you have the oath of the woman herself, who hath been present here, and tells you the same thing. Dixon he comes and says, in August last, Mowbray said he knew nothing of the prisoner, which may be answered by his fear; but concerning the two witnesses that Mr. Solicitor did take notice, he did tell you, and it is plain, how very improbable it was two persons should speak in the presence of strangers, and tell them they were about to take away the life of another person, the one of the lady Tempest, who had done him a displeasure, the other of sir T. Gascoigne; but Mowbray at that time said he knew nothing of sir T. Gascoigne; but, gentlemen, besides what was said before, this is improbable any such thing should be, and you hear the witnesses, at least one of them, that he never knew one of the two. Mr. Bolron. I knew neither of them. Just. Jones. I should be very loth to omit any thing on the witnesses side, or that hath been materially testified against them on the prisoner's. I did not conceive the evidence given by Mr. Pebles to come to any thing at all. There was a discourse between Bolron and him at last assizes; after some talk Bolron tells him he had something to say to him, and what was it? Bolron was told that he had discharged some persons that he ought not to do, (excused them for money that did not take the oath of allegiance as they ought to have done) and it seems he did it here, and so far he went as to bring witnesses before the justices of peace to prove it. And although they did not give evidence against Mr. Pebles in that very particnlar, yet certainly he thought they would have said something; but that does not argue at all, that because he did accuse Mr. Pebles (as he thought justly in that particular), therefore, that now he should falsly accuse sir Thomas in a matter that concerns his life so highly. There are some other things that were said by the witnesses that would tend towards the proving of some malice in the witnesses towards sir T. Gascoigne, and therefore they give in this evidence: One thing indeed was spoken by Hickeringil; that is, it was generally reported in the country, that Mowbray had taken away money from sir T. Gascoigne, and that Mow bray himself said, that as they had endeavoured to take away his fame and life, now he had found an opportunity to requite them. So saith the witness, but it is not very probable. I leave it with you upon the credit of the witnesses for the king, who have sworn it upon their oaths, and the others that go upon their words, and not their oaths, whether they have taken away the force and strength of the king's evidence, which is as full, express, and positive as can be by two witnesses. Gentlemen, here is on the one side the life of an ancient gentleman before you; on the other side there is a conspiracy against the life of the king, who is the breath of our nostrils, and whom God long preserve. 1 know you being upon your oaths will take into your considerations both, and give a verdict according to the evidence you have heard. Just. Dolben. I will tell you gentlemen, I cannot forbear saying one thing to you. There is some evidence that makes it a very improbable thing to be true what Mr. Bolron hath said; and yet Mr. Bolron having said it so positively, and Mowbray agreeing with it, probabilities must give way to positive proofs. I saw you did observe it when it was mentioned: and it is true, to me it seems improbable, that at the very same time that sir Tho. Gascoigne should sue him upon his bond, and take a course to turn him out of his house, that he should then be privy to such a conspiracy; it is improbable either that sir Thomas should offer him such a sum of money to kill the king, or if be| had, that he should afterwards take that course at law against him. Now for that I say this to you, you are to give a verdict according to your evidence. They have such secret contrivances amongst themselves, (and he was a papist at that time) that where there are two men that positively tell you a thing that lies within their own knowledge, and swear it is true, it is scarce any improbability that should weigh against such an evidence. Just. Pemberton. And, gentlemen, consider withal as to that; for truly my brother Dolben hath rightly minded you of that improbability, for it was no more: but then you must consider all the circumstances. It is indeed at the first blush improbable that a man would communicate so great a secret to another, if he did intend to sue him for money he owed him; but then it is likewise as improbable that he would provoke him by a suit if his life were in his hand; but consider the delivering of the lease of ejectment, and those things were the 13th of June. VOL. VII. | Mr. Babbington. But I hrad sued him before my lord. Just. Dolben. The 2d of June, he says. Mr. Babbington. I had direction long before I did it. Look Just. Pemberton. They threatened him the 2d, but they did not do it. But look you, gentlemen, consider this; I do not doubt but sir T. Gascoigne was sure that this man durst not discover any thing of this, for they had given him the sacrament and an oath of secrecy, which they look upon as a tie, among themselves, as long as they continue in that religion, not upon any account whatsoever to be undone; and they have such confidence in it, that they will trust their lives and every thing in a man's hand when they have given that oath. Alas! how could these people have the confidence to plot one with another, as they do, when they know their lives are in the hands of any one of all the rest, but upon this account? Do but swear them unto secrecy, and give them the sacrament of the mass upon it, and then they think such a one is proof enough against any thing in the world for that is damnation if they break it, as their priests tell them; but I doubt not but sir Thomas thought he had them as fast as can be upon that lock. But as to sir Thomas's evidence of those two men at Leeds, this is after the accusation of sir Thomas that they spake of; and can any man alive believe that they would go and plot to contrive the death of these two persons in the face of two strangers, after he was accused? It is so strange an evidence, that no man alive can believe it to be truth. you, gentlemen, persons that go to contrive such things as these are, go in secret, and hope they should never be discovered, but by one of themselves. Who would contrive when two be by? and, if they say true, might see them as well as hear them? though they did contradict one another in their evidence; the one said he was above, the other said he was below; the one said he might see them, the other not. Look you, gentlemen, I do see that they do lay some stress upon this, that he was his debtor, for that they seem to prove by their witnesses; but you must lay no great stress upon that at all, for the money were not quit if sir Thomas were found guilty; the money is due to the king then he saves nothing by it, his money must be paid; let the prisoner be found Guilty, or not Guilty it is all one to him. You must consider this case, gentlemen: if you believe these men are perjured men, and have gone and contrived a malicious design against a man's life, then God forbid they should be believed anyway: but it is a positive evidence; and it isnot an evidence barely of itself, but introduced by a great inany circumstances that went before; they tell you the whole affair that it does seem they have been privy to the affairs of these Jesuits all along, and sir Tho. Gascoigne's house hath it seems abounded with them; he hath been very beneficial to that sort of people, mighty charitable, as they call it, in superstition; and you must consider, that nothing can seem strange to them that will be 3 X ridden by priests; they put them upon all the Just. Dolben. Look you, sir Thomas Hodson, and the gentlemen of the jury, if you will come in again in any time we will stay in court, otherwise you must lie by it all night, for we can take no privy verdict in this case. Just. Pemberton. Ay, we will stay and hear motions a little while. Then the jury withdrew from the bar, and after half an hour returned again, and being called over gave their verdict thus: Cl. of the Cr. Sir Thomas Gasooigne, hold up thy hand. Look upon the prisoner: How say you? Is he Guilty of the High-Treason whereof he stands indicted, or Not Guilty? Foreman. Not Guilty. Cl. of the Cr. Did he fly for it? Then the Verdict was recorded, and the 265. The Trial of ELIZABETH CELLIER, at the King's-Bench, for High Treason: 32 CHARLES II. A. D. 1680. AFTER the Jury were sworn, the clerk of the crown read the Indictment, viz: The jurors of our lord the king do present, that Elizabeth Cellier, wife of Peter Cellier, late of the parish of St. Clement Danes in the county of Middlesex, gent. stands indicted, for that she as a false traitoress against our most illustrious and excellent prince, king Charles 2. her natural lord, not having God be fore her eyes, not weighing the duty of her allegiance; but by the instigation of the devil moved and seduced, and the cordial love and true due natural obedience which all faithful subjects of our said lord the king towards him should bear, and of right are bound to bear, utterly withdrawing, and devising, and with all her might intending the peace and common tranquillity of this kingdom to disturb, and to bring and put our said lord the king to death and final destruction, and the true worship of God in this realm by the law established and used, to alter to the superstition of the church of Rome; to move and stir up war against the king in this kingdom, and to subvert the government of this realm; the 1st day of November, in the 31st year of the said king's reign, at the parish of St. Clement Dane aforesaid, when divers other false traitors unknown, traiterously did compass, imagine, and intend the killing, death and final destruction of our said lord the king, and to change, alter, and utterly to subvert the ancient government of this realm, and to depose, and wholly to deprive in the said king of his crown and government of this kingdom, and to extirpate the true religion within this realm established, and so fulfil and accomplish the same most wicked treasons and traiterous imaginations and purposes, the same Elizabeth Cellier, and other false traitors unknown, the said 1st day of November, in the 31st year aforesaid, with force and arms, &c. at the parish of St. Clement Danes aforesaid, advisedly, devilishly, maliciously, and traiter ously assembled, united, and gathered themselves together, and then and there devilishly, advisedly, maliciously, cunningly, and traiter ously consulted and agreed to bring the said lord the king to death and final destruction, and to depose and deprive him of his crown and government, and so introduce and establish the Romish religion in this kingdom; and the sooner to fulfil and effect the same most wicked treasons and traiterous imaginations and purposes, the said Elizabeth Cellier, and other un known traitors, then and there did contribute, pay and expend divers great sums of money to several unknown persons, to procure them traiterously to kill the said king, and introduce the Romish religion in this realm; and for the better concealing of the treasons aforesaid, the said Elizabeth Cellier then and there did pay and expend to divers other persons unknown, divers other sums of money, falsly to impose the said treasons upon some other persons unknown, against the duty of her allegiance, aud against the peace of our lord the king, his crown and diguity, and against the form of the statute in such case made and provided, &c.” John Gadbury sworn. L. C. J. (sir William Scroggs.) Mr. Gadbury, What do you know concerning this plot? Gadbury. I know nothing of it, neither one way nor another. L. C. J. Do you know of any contrivance of Mrs. Cellier's to kill the king? Gadbury. No, rather the contrary. L. C. J. Do you know of any attempts to change the government? Gadbury. I will tell your lordship what I do know, if these gentlemen will not be too nimble for me. I have suffered a great deal of preju dice of late in relation to a plot, as if I had known of a plot; but God is my witness, I know of none, unless it were a plot to bring sir Robert Peyton over to the king's interest. That plot I had some concern in, and had some knowledge of Mrs. Cellier's concern in it; but she was so far from doing any thing against the king's interest, that she was willing to bring over with him the three gentlemen turned out |