unknown to the rest of his fellow-servants. On the first available opportunity,' however, he sent news to the nearest magistrate of their presence in the house; for which act of treachery he was officially rewarded with an annuity, or the promise of an annuity, of forty marks. The result of his giving information was that Stephen Lyttleton and Robert Winter were quickly captured, and sent to the Tower; whilst Perkes and Humphrey Lyttleton were arrested, and taken to Worcester.

This act of the wily cook also conduced to more important results than the seizure of the fugitives, for it led directly to the capture of the Jesuit Fathers, Garnet and Oldcorne, whom the Government looked upon as a more important prize than any one of the individuals directly concerned in the plot.

Tried at Worcester, Humphrey Lyttleton was found guilty, and sentenced to death. He offered, however, if his life were spared, to give the Government valuable information as to the whereabouts of some of the Jesuits, especially in regard to 'Mr. Hall' (Father Oldcorne, S.J.). This offer was accepted, provided that he made good his promise. He, thereupon, not only gave an account of some conversations he had had with Oldcorne, but also stated that he had every reason to believe that this Jesuit was lying concealed

1 January 9, 1606. From a further account, which I shall quote later on, it seems that another servant participated in the betrayal.

at Hendlip Hall. This news was sent to the. searchers at Hendlip, near Worcester, and after a long quest, not only was Oldcorne captured there, but Father Garnet' also, who surrendered himself into the hands of Sir Henry Bromley, a local magistrate.

Thus, owing to the cupidity of a menial, was effected, by a most extraordinary series of accidents, the capture of Father Henry Garnet, the Superior of the English Jesuits, who was put on his trial for treason, and hanged in St. Paul's Churchyard.

Humphrey Lyttleton's life was not spared, after all, and he suffered the same fate' as the priests he had betrayed.

Stephen Lyttleton was eventually executed at Stafford,

The adventures of Robert Winter and Stephen Lyttleton during the period (nearly two months) which intervened between their escape from Holbeach and their capture at Hagley were of so exciting and romantic a nature as to bear some resemblance to those of Charles II. after the Battle of Worcester. Both Charles and the plotters were saved more than once from capture

1 Hallam makes a curious error when he says, in his Constitutional History, that Garnet was 'taken at Henlip along with the other conspirators.'

2 In defence of the Government, it has been asserted that Humphrey Lyttleton was merely offered a reprieve; but this seems absurd, for no man would betray his best friends, unless he received some very strong inducement to do so.

by farmers, and the first series of their adventures commenced in the same part of England. The anxiety which the fugitives from Holbeach were a prey to baffles description, for over and over again they fancied, when hiding beneath some hay in the barns, that they heard the footsteps of men coming to arrest them; and when, at last, they thought themselves safe, for a time, at Hagley Hall, they were betrayed by a servant in whom they had placed implicit trust.

CHAPTER XI

G

THE TRAITORS IN THE TOWER

UY FAUKES was the first of the plotters to be incarcerated in the Tower, which

he actually reached reached not long after the time fixed for consummating his terrible scheme. As he had refused to incriminate his friends, he was speedily put to the torture, being by the King's direction subjected to the 'gentler' torments first, and then gradually to the more severe. His stubborn courage and strong frame were not proof against the series of torments under which he was placed, and he was compelled to confess.' But, in his confession, or confessions, he only told the Government what was practically known to them before; and in the delirium of pain he never fulfilled the desire of Salisbury's heart, namely, to denounce Father Henry Garnet. Even in admitting that he and his confederates had received the Sacrament at the hands of Father John Gerard, S.J., he denied that Gerard knew anything of the plot;

1 He confessed 'when told he must come to it againe and againe, from daye to daye, till he should have delivered his whole knowledge' (Dom. S.P. James I. vol. xvi.).

but this most important statement was deliberately omitted by the counsel for the Crown at his trial, so that the spectators in Court went away under the impression that Gerard was an accessory to the crime. But, before dealing with the admissions wrung from the tortured Faukes, it will be best to notice the case of Francis Tresham, whose earthly career was now nearing its end.

It is a significant fact that Tresham's name was omitted from the proclamation quoted above. Probably, Lord Mounteagle did his best to screen his relative so long as he could, and it was not until more than a week after Guy Faukes's arrest that Tresham shared the same fate. In the Tower he soon became ill, and died on December 23. The cause of his death has been, and is still, the subject of much debate. Both Lord Salisbury and Sir William Waad (the Lieutenant of the Tower) declared that Tresham died of an internal complaint, from which he had a long time been suffering, and that he was a dying man when he entered the Tower of London.

Rumour, however, attributed his end to poison. That his death was extremely opportune, so far as Mounteagle's position was concerned, need not be disputed. It is clear that Tresham not only 'knew too much' to suit both Salisbury and Mounteagle; and of his possession of this knowledge he foolishly made no secret. Against the

1 At about two o'clock a.m. The date of his death has been wrongly given as the 22nd.