THE POWDER PLOT. III.the powder plot. iii.
When we remember the terms in which the secretary had previously described him, as well as the result about to ensue, it is not a little startling to remark with what emphasis it was protested, in season and out, that a ruling principle of the government's action was to do nothing which might even seem to cast a slur upon the earl's character, while at the same time the very point is artfully insinuated which was to be turned against him.[435]Thus in the "King's Book," in explanation of the curious roundabout courses adopted in connection with the "discovery," we are told that a far-fetched excuse was devised for the search determined upon, lest it might "lay an ill-favoured imputation upon the Earl of Northumberland, one of his Majesty's greatest subjects and counsellors; this Thomas Percy being his kinsman and most confident familiar." So again Cecil wrote to the ambassadors: "It hath been thought meet in policy of State (all circumstances considered) to commit the Earl of Northumberlandto the Archbishop of Canterbury, there to be honourably used, until things be more quiet. Whereof if you shall hear any judgment made, as if his Majesty or his council could harbour a thought of such a savage practice to be lodged in such a nobleman's breast, you shall do well to suppress it as a malicious discourse and invention, this being only done to satisfy the world that nothing be undone which belongs to policy of State, when the whole monarchy was proscribed to dissolution; and being no more than himself discreetly approved when he received the sentence of the council for his restraint."
Yet what was the issue? A series of charges were brought against Northumberland, all of which broke down except that of having, as Captain of the Royal Pensioners, admitted Percy amongst them without exacting the usual oath. He in vain demanded an open trial, and was brought before the Star Chamber, by which, after he had been assailed by Coke in the same violent strain previously employed against Raleigh, he was sentenced to forfeit all offices which he held under the Crown, to be imprisoned during the king's pleasure, and to pay a fine of £30,000, equal to at least ten times that sum at the present day.
As if this were not enough, fresh proceedings were taken against him six years later, when he was again subjected to examination, and again, says Lingard,[436]foiled the ingenuity or malice of his persecutor.
It seems, therefore, by no means extraordinary that men, as we have heard from the French ambassador, should have commonly attributed the earl's ruin to the resolution of his great rival to remove from his own path every obstacle likely to be dangerous, or that Cecil should himself bear witness,[437]in 1611, to the "bruites" touching Northumberland which were afloat, and should be anxious, as "knowing how various a discourse a subject of this nature doth beget," to "prevent any erroneous impression by a brief narrative of the true motive and progress of the business."
As to Northumberland's own sentiments, he, we are told by Osborne,[438]declared that the blood of Percy would refuse to mix with that of Cecil if they were poured together in the same basin.
It is, moreover, evident not only that the great statesman, to use Bishop Goodman's term, actually profited largely by the powder business, but that from the first he saw in it a means for materially strengthening his position; an opportunity which he lost no time in turning to account by making it appear that in such a crisis he was absolutely necessary to the State. This is shown by the remarkable manifesto which he promptly issued, a document which appears to have been almost forgotten, though well deserving attention.
A characteristic feature of the traitorous proceedings of the period was the inveterate habit of conspirators to drop compromising documents in the street, or to throwthem into yards and windows. In the court of Salisbury House was found, in November, 1605, a threatening letter, more than usually extraordinary. It purported to come from five Catholics, who began by unreservedly condemning the Gunpowder Plot as a work abhorred by their co-religionists as much as by any Protestants. Since, however, his lordship, beyond all others, seemed disposed to take advantage of so foul a scandal, in order to root out all memory of the Catholic religion, they proceeded to warn him that they had themselves vowed his death, and in such fashion that their success was certain. None of the accomplices knew who the others were, but it was settled who should first make the attempt, and who, in order, afterwards. Moreover, death had no terrors for any of them, two being stricken with mortal sickness, which must soon be fatal; while the other three were in such mental affliction as not to care what became of them.
As a reply to this strange effusion Cecil published a tract,[439]obviously intended as a companion to the famous "King's Book," in which with elaborate modesty he owned to the impeachment of being more zealous than others in the good cause, and protested his resolution, at whatever peril to himself, to continue his services tohis king and country. The sum and substance of this curious apology is as follows.
Having resolved to recall his thoughts from the earthly theatre to higher things, which statesmen are supposed overmuch to neglect, he had felt he could choose no better theme for his meditations than the "King's Book," wherein so many lively images of God's great favour and providence are represented, every line discovering where Apelles' hand hath been; so that all may see there needs now no Elisha to tell the King of Israel what the Aramites do in their privatest councils.
While in this most serious and silent meditation, divided between rapture at God's infinite mercy and justice, and thought of his own happiness to live under a king pleasing to God for his zealous endeavours to cleanse the vessels of his kingdom from the dregs and lees of the Romish grape,—and while his heart was not a little cheered to observe any note of his own name in the royal register, for one that had been of any little use in this so fortunate discovery,—as the poor day labourer who taketh contentment when he passeth that glorious architecture, to the building whereof he can remember to have carried some few sticks and stones,—while thus blissfully engaged, he is grieved to find himself singled out from the honourable body of the council,—why, he knows not, for with it he would be content to be identified—as the author of the policy which is being adopted; and, conscious that in his humble person the Body of Authority is assailed, he thinks it well, for once, to make a reply.
Having recited the threatening letter in full, he presently continues:
"Though I participate not in the follies of that fly who thought herself to raise the dust because she sat on the chariot-wheel, yet I am so far from disavowing my honest ambition of my master's favour, as I am desirous that the world should hold me, not so much his creature, by the undeserved honours I hold from his grace and power, as my desire to be the shadow of his mind, and to frame my judgment, knowledge, and affections according to his. Towards whose Royal Person I shall glory more to be always found an honest and humble subject, than I should to command absolutely in any other calling."
Of those who threaten him he says very little, assuming, however, as self-evident, that they are set on by some priest, who, after the manner of his tribe, doth "carry the unlearned Catholics, like hawks hooded, into those dangerous positions."
But, as for himself, let the world understand that he is not the man to neglect his duty on account of the personal danger it entails. "Far I hope it shall be from me, who know so well in whoseHoly Bookmy days are numbered, once to entertain a thought to purchase a span of time, at so dear a rate, as for the fear of any mortal power, in my poor talent,Aut Deo, aut Patriæ, aut Patri patriæ deesse."[440]
In spite of the singular ability of this manifesto, the art of the writer is undoubtedly somewhat too conspicuous to permit us to accept it as the kind of document which would be produced by one who felt himself confronted by a serious peril. An interesting and most pertinent commentary is supplied by a contemporary Jesuit, Giles Schondonck, Rector of St. Omers College, in a letter to Father Baldwin, the same of whom we have already heard in connection with the Plot.[441]
Schondonck has, he says, read and re-read Cecil's book, which Baldwin had lent him. If his opinion be required, he finds in it many flowers of wit and eloquence, and it is a composition well adapted for its object; but the original letter which has evoked this brilliant rejoinder is a manifest fraud, not emanating from any Catholic, but devised by the enemies of the Church for her injury. The writers plainly contradict themselves. They begin by denouncing the Powder Plot as impious and abominable, and they do so most righteously, and they declare its authors to have been turbulent spirits and not religious, in which also they are right. But they go on to approve the design of murdering Cecil. What sense is there in this? If the one design be impious and detestable, with whatcolour or conscience can the other be approved? There is no difference of principle, though in the one case many were to be murdered, in the other but a single man. No one having in him any spark of religion could defend either project, much less approve it. Moreover, much that is set down is simply ridiculous. Men in the last extremity of sickness, or broken down by sorrow, are not of the stuff whereof those are made by whom desperate deeds are done.
From another Jesuit we obtain instructive information which at least serves to show what was the opinion of Catholics as to the way in which things were being managed. This is conveyed in a letter addressed December 1st, 1606, to the famous Father Parsons by Father Richard Blount, Father Garnet's successor as superior of the English mission.[442]It must be remembered that this was not meant for the public eye, and in fact was never published. It cannot have been intended to obtain credence for a particular version of history, and it was written to him who, of all men, was behind the scenes so far as the English Jesuits were concerned. Much of it is in cipher which, fortunately, has been interpreted for us by the recipient.
Blount begins with a piece of intelligence which is startling enough. Amongst the lords of the council none was a more zealous enemy of Popery than the chamberlain, the Earl of Suffolk,[443]who was more than once on the commission for expelling priests and Jesuits, and had in particular been so energetic in the matter of the Powder Plot that Salisbury modestlyconfessed that in regard of the "discovery" he had himself been "much less forward."[444]Now, however, we are told, only a twelvemonth later, that this nobleman and his wife are ready for a sufficient fee to procure "some kind of peace" for the Catholics. The needful sum may probably be raised through the Spanish Ambassador, but the issue is doubtful "because Salisbury will resist."—"Yet such is the want of money with the chamberlain at this time—whose expenses are infinite—that either Salisbury must supply, or else he must needs break with him."[445]
After some particulars concerning the jealousy against the Scots, and the matter of the union (which "sticketh much in the Parliament's teeth") Blount goes on to relate how Cecil has been attempting to float a second Powder Plot—the scene being this time the king's court itself. He has had another letter brought in, to set it going, and had seemingly calculated on capturing the writer himself and some of his brethren in connection with it. In this, however, he has been foiled, and the matter appears to have been dropped. In Blount's own words:[446]
"Now these last days we expected some new stratagem, because Salisbury pretended a letter to be brought to his lordship found by chance in St. Clement's Churchyard, written in ciphers, wherein were many persons named, and a question asked, whether there were any concavity under the stage in the court. But belike the device failed, and so we hear no words of it. About this time this house was ransacked, where by chance Blount came late the night before, finding four more, Talbot, N. Smith, Wright, Arnold; being all besieged from morning to night. If things had fallen out as was expected, then that letter would have haply been spoken of, whereas now it is very secret, and only served to pick a thanks of King James, with whom Salisbury keepeth his credit by such tricks, as upon whose vigilancy his majesty's life dependeth."
One other feature of the after history demands consideration. As Fuller tells us,[447]"a learned author, making mention of this treason, breaketh forth into the following rapture:
'Excidat illa dies aevo, ne postera credantSaecula; nos certe taceamus, et obruta multâNocte tegi propriae patiamur crimina gentis.''Oh, let that day be quite dashed out of time,And not believ'd by the next generation;In night of silence we'll conceal the crime,Thereby to save the credit of the nation.'"
'Excidat illa dies aevo, ne postera credantSaecula; nos certe taceamus, et obruta multâNocte tegi propriae patiamur crimina gentis.'
'Oh, let that day be quite dashed out of time,And not believ'd by the next generation;In night of silence we'll conceal the crime,Thereby to save the credit of the nation.'"
"A wish," he adds, "which in my opinion, hath more of poetry than of piety therein, and from which I must beforced to dissent." Assuredly if it were judged that silence and oblivion should be the lot of the conspiracy, no stranger means were ever adopted to secure the desired object. A public thanksgiving was appointed to be held every year, on the anniversary of the "discovery;" a special service for that day was inserted in the Anglican liturgy, and Gunpowder Plot Sermons kept the memory of the Treason green in the mind not of one but of many generations.
Moreover, the country was flooded with literature on the subject, in prose and rhyme, and the example of Milton is sufficient to show how favourite a topic it was with youthful poets essaying to try their wings.[448]
In regard of the history, one line was consistently adopted. The Church of England in its calendar marked November 5th, as thePapists' Conspiracy, and in the collect appointed for the day the king and estates of the realm were described as being "by Popish treachery appointed as sheep to the slaughter, in a most barbarous and savage manner, beyond the examples of former ages." Similarly, preachers and writers alike concurred in saying little or nothing about the actual conspirators, but much about the iniquity of Rome; the official character of the Plot, and its sanction, even its first suggestion, by the highest authorities of the Church, being the chief feature ofthe tale hammered year after year into the ears of the English people. The details of history supplied are frequently pure and unmixed fables.[449]
THE POWDER PLOT. IV.the powder plot. iv.
Nor was the pencil less active than the pen in popularizing the same belief. Great was the ingenuity spent in devising and producing pictures which should impresson the minds of the most illiterate a holy horror of the Church which had doomed the nation to destruction. One of the most elaborate of these was headed by an inscription which admirably summarizes the moral of the tale.
The Powder Treason.—Propounded bySatan: Approved byAntichrist[i.e.the Pope]: Enterprised byPapists: Practized byTraitors: Revealed by anEagle[Monteagle]: Expounded by anOracle[King James]: Founded inHell: Confounded inHeaven.
Accordingly we find representations of Lucifer, the Pope, the King of Spain, the General of the Jesuits, and other such worthies, conspiring in the background while the redoubtable Guy walks arm in arm with a demon to fire the mine, the latter grasping a papal Bull (unknown to the Bullarium), expedited to promote the project: or again, Faukes and Catesby stand secretly conspiring in the middle of the street, while Father Garnet, in full Jesuit habit (or what is meant for such) exhorts them to go on: or a priest gives the conspirators "the sacrament of secrecy;" or representative Romish dignitaries blow threats and curses against England and her Parliament House,—or the Jesuits are buried in Hell in recompense of their perfidy.
It cannot, however, escape remark that while the limners have been conscientiously careful in respect of these details, they have one and all discarded accuracy in regard of another matter in which we might naturally have expected it. In no single instance is Guy Faukes represented as about to blow up the right house. Sometimes it is the House of Commons that he is going to destroy, more frequently the PaintedChamber, often a nondescript building corresponding to nothing in particular,—but in no single instance is it the House of Lords.
THE POWDER PLOT. V.the powder plot. v.
The most extraordinary instance of so strange a vagary is afforded by a plate produced immediately after the occurrence it commemorates, in the year 1605 itself.[450]In this, Faukes with his inseparable lantern, but without the usual spurs, is seen advancing to the door of the "cellar," which stands conspicuous above ground. Aloft is seen the crescent moon, represented in exactly the right phase for the date of the discovery.[451]The accuracy exhibited as to this singular detail makes it more than ever extraordinary that the building to which he directs his steps is unquestionably St. Stephen's Chapel—The House of Commons.
One point of the history, in itself apparently insignificant, was at the time invested with such extravagant importance, as to suggest a question in its regard, namely the day itself whereon the marvellous deliverance took place. A curious combination of circumstances alone assigned it to the notorious Fifth of November. Parliament, as we have seen, was originally appointed to meet on the 3rd of October, but was suddenly adjourned for about a month, and so little reason did there seem to be for the prorogation[452]as tofill the conspirators with alarm lest some suspicion of their design had prompted it; wherefore they sent Thomas Winter to attend the prorogation ceremony, and observe the demeanour of those who took part in it. Afterwards, though the discovery might have easily been made any time during the preceding week, nothing practical was done till the fateful day itself had actually begun, when, as the acute Lingard has not failed to observe, a remarkable change at once came over the conduct of the authorities, who discarding the aimless and dilatory manner of proceeding which had hitherto characterized them, went straight to the point with a promptitude and directness leaving nothing to be desired.
Whatever were their motive in all this, the action of the government undoubtedly brought it about that the great blow should be struck on a day which not a little enhanced the evidence for the providential character of the whole affair. Tuesday was King James' lucky day, more especially when it happened to be the 5th of the month, for on Tuesday, August the 5th, 1600, he had escaped the mysterious treason of the Gowries.
This coincidence evidently created a profound impression. "Curious folks observe," wrote Chamberlain to Carleton,[453]"that this deliverance happened on the fifth of November, answerable to the fifth of August, both Tuesdays; and this plot to be executed by Johnson [the assumed name of Faukes], and that at Johnstown [i.e., Perth]." On the 27th of November, Lakesuggested to the Archbishop of Canterbury,[454]that as a perpetual memorial of this so providential circumstance, the anniversary sermon should always be delivered upon a Tuesday. Two days later, the Archbishop wrote to his suffragans,[455]reminding them how on a Tuesday his majesty had escaped the Gowries, and now, on another Tuesday, a peril still more terrible, which must have ruined the whole nation, had not the Holy Ghost illumined the king's heart with a divine spirit. In remembrance of which singular instance of God's governance, there was to be an annual celebration.[456]
Most important of all, King James himself much appreciated the significance of this token of divine protection, and not only impressed this upon his Parliament, but proroguing it forthwith till after Christmas, selected the same propitious day of the week for its next meeting, as a safeguard against possible danger. "Since it has pleased God," said his majesty,[457]"to grant me two such notable deliveries upon one day of the week, which was Tuesday, and likewise one day of the month, which was the fifth, thereby to teach me that as it was the same devil that still persecuted me, so it was one and the same God that still mightily delivered me, I thought it therefore notamiss, that the twenty-first day which fell to be upon Tuesday, should be the day of meeting of this next session of parliament, hoping and assuring myself, that the same God, who hath now granted me and you all so notable and gracious a delivery, shall prosper all our affairs at that next session, and bring them to an happy conclusion."
Whatever may be thought of this particular element of its history, it is perfectly clear that the fashion in which the Plot was habitually set before the English people, and which contributed more than anything else to work the effect actually produced, was characterized from the first by an utter disregard of truth on the part of those whose purposes it so opportunely served, and with such lasting results.
The evidence available to us appears to establish principally two points,—that the true history of the Gunpowder Plot is now known to no man, and that the history commonly received is certainly untrue.
It is quite impossible to believe that the government were not aware of the Plot long before they announced its discovery.
It is difficult to believe that the proceedings of the conspirators were actually such as they are related to have been.
It is unquestionable that the government consistently falsified the story and the evidence as presented to the world, and that the points upon which they most insisted prove upon examination to be the most doubtful.
There are grave reasons for the conclusion that the whole transaction was dexterously contrived for the purpose which in fact it opportunely served, by those who alone reaped benefit from it, and who showed themselves so unscrupulous in the manner of reaping.
FOOTNOTES:[423]Criminal Trials, ii. I.[424]Nugæ Antiquæ, i. 374.[425]Harleian Miscellany, iv. 249.[426]This terrible state of things was alleged as a principal reason for the prorogation of the Parliament for two months and a half. As a matter of fact, the rebels had been overthrown and captured the day before that on which the king's speech was delivered, and news of that event was received that same evening.[427]Commons' Journals.[428]In the preamble of the Act so passed we read: "Forasmuch as it is found by daily experience, that many his Majesty's subjects that adhere in their hearts to the popish religion, by the infection drawn from thence, and by the wicked and devilish counsel of jesuits, seminaries, and other like persons dangerous to the church and state, are so perverted in the point of their loyalties and due allegiance unto the King's majesty, and the Crown of England, as they are ready to entertain and execute any treasonable conspiracies and practices, as evidently appears by that more than barbarous and horrible attempt to have blown up with gunpowder the King, Queen ..." etc., etc.[429]Negotiations, p. 256.[430]"Our parliament is prorogued till the 18th of next November. Many things have been considerable in it, but especially the zeal of both Houses for the preservation of God's true religion, by establishing many good laws against Popery and those firebrands, Jesuits, and Priests, that seek to bring all things into confusion. His Majesty resolveth once more by proclamation to banish them all; and afterwards, if they shall not obey, then the laws shall go upon them without any more forbearance."—Cecil to Winwood, June 7th, 1606 (Winwood,Memorials, ii. 219).[431]In theDictionary of National Biography, and Doyle'sOfficial Baronage, this installation is erroneously assigned to 1605.[432]Chronicle, p. 408.[433]Continuation of Stowe'sAnnals, p. 883.[434]Letter iii.[435]At Northumberland's trial Lord Salisbury thus expressed himself: "I have taken paines in my nowne heart to clear my lord's offences, which now have leade me from the contemplation of his virtues; for I knowe him vertuous, wyse, valiaunte, and of use and ornamente to the state.... The cause of this combustion was the papistes seekinge to restore their religion. Non libens dico, sed res ipsa loquitur."—Hawarde,Les Reportes, etc.[436]History, vii. 84, note. On this subject Mr. Sawyer, the editor of Winwood (1715), has the following remark: "We meet with some account of his [Northumberland's] offence, though couched in such tender terms, that 'tis a little difficult to conceive it deserved so heavy a punishment as a fine of £30,000 and perpetual imprisonment." (Memorials, iii. 287, note.)[437]To Winwood,Memorials, iii. 287.[438]Traditional Memoirs, p. 214.[439]An Answere to certaine Scandalous Papers, scattered abroad under colour of a Catholicke Admonition."Qui facit vivere, docet orare." Imprinted at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the King's most Eccellent Majestie. Anno 1606.This was published in January, 1605-6, on the 28th of which month Sir W. Browne, writing from Flushing, mentions that "my lord of Salisbury hath lately published a little booke as a kynd of answer to som secrett threatning libelling letters cast into his chamber." (Stowe MSS., 168, 74, f. 308.)[440]On this subject Cornwallis wrote to Salisbury (Winwood, ii. 193): "Many reports are here spread of the Combination against your Lordship, and that five English Romanists would resolve your death. It seems that since they cannot be allowedSacrificium incruentum, they will now altogether put in use their sacrifices of blood. But I hope and suppose that their hearts and their hands want much of the vigour that rests in their wills and their pens. Your Lordship doth take especial courage in this, that they single you out as the chief and principal watch Tower of your Country and Commonwealth, and turn the strength of their malice to you whom they hold the discoverer of all their unnatural and destructive inventions against their prince and country," etc.[441]P.R.O.Dom. James I.xviii. 97, February 27th, N.S., 1606. The original, which is in Latin, has been utterly misunderstood by the Calendarer of State Papers.[442]Stonyhurst MSS.,Anglia, iii. 72.[443]Thomas Howard, cr. 1603.[444]To the ambassadors.[445]Father Blount's account is undoubtedly in keeping with what we know of the Earl, and especially of his Countess, who was a sister of Sir Thomas Knyvet, the captor of Guy Faukes. Suffolk, in 1614, became Lord High Treasurer, but four years afterwards grave irregularities were discovered in his office; he was accused of embezzlement and extortion, in which work his wife was proved to have been even more active than himself. They were sentenced to restore all money wrongfully extorted, to a fine of £30,000, and to imprisonment during pleasure.[446]In this letter all proper names are in cipher, as well as various other words.[447]Church History, x. 40.[448]We have four Latin epigrams of Milton's,In proditionem Bombardicam, which, though pointless, are bitterly anti-Catholic. A longer poem, of 226 lines,In quintum Novembris, is still more virulent.It is somewhat remarkable that the universal Shakespeare should make no allusion to the Plot, beyond the doubtful reference to equivocation inMacbeth(ii. 3). He was at the time of its occurrence in the full flow of his dramatic activity.[449]See Appendix L,Myths and Legends of the Powder Plot.[450]Brit. Mus. Print Room, Crace Collection, portf. xv. 28. This is reproduced, as our frontispiece.[451]There was a new moon at 11.30 p.m. on October 31st.[452]The reasons assigned in the proclamation for this prorogation are plainly insufficient: viz., "That the holding of it [the Parliament] so soone is not convenient, as well for that the ordinary course of our subjects resorting to the citie for their usuall affaires at the Terme is not for the most part till Allhallowtide or thereabouts." Why, then, had the meeting been fixed for so unsuitable a date?[453]November 7th, 1605. (Dom. James I.)[454]Tanner MSS. lxxv. 44.[455]Ibid.[456]On his arrival in England, as Osborne tells us (Memoirs, p. 276), King James "brought a new holiday into the Church of England, wherein God had publick thanks given him for his majestie's deliverance out of the hands of Earle Goury;" but the introduction was not a success, Englishmen and Scots alike ridiculing it. Gunpowder Plot Day was more fortunate.[457]Harleian Miscellany, iv. 251.
[423]Criminal Trials, ii. I.
[424]Nugæ Antiquæ, i. 374.
[425]Harleian Miscellany, iv. 249.
[426]This terrible state of things was alleged as a principal reason for the prorogation of the Parliament for two months and a half. As a matter of fact, the rebels had been overthrown and captured the day before that on which the king's speech was delivered, and news of that event was received that same evening.
[427]Commons' Journals.
[428]In the preamble of the Act so passed we read: "Forasmuch as it is found by daily experience, that many his Majesty's subjects that adhere in their hearts to the popish religion, by the infection drawn from thence, and by the wicked and devilish counsel of jesuits, seminaries, and other like persons dangerous to the church and state, are so perverted in the point of their loyalties and due allegiance unto the King's majesty, and the Crown of England, as they are ready to entertain and execute any treasonable conspiracies and practices, as evidently appears by that more than barbarous and horrible attempt to have blown up with gunpowder the King, Queen ..." etc., etc.
[429]Negotiations, p. 256.
[430]"Our parliament is prorogued till the 18th of next November. Many things have been considerable in it, but especially the zeal of both Houses for the preservation of God's true religion, by establishing many good laws against Popery and those firebrands, Jesuits, and Priests, that seek to bring all things into confusion. His Majesty resolveth once more by proclamation to banish them all; and afterwards, if they shall not obey, then the laws shall go upon them without any more forbearance."—Cecil to Winwood, June 7th, 1606 (Winwood,Memorials, ii. 219).
[431]In theDictionary of National Biography, and Doyle'sOfficial Baronage, this installation is erroneously assigned to 1605.
[432]Chronicle, p. 408.
[433]Continuation of Stowe'sAnnals, p. 883.
[434]Letter iii.
[435]At Northumberland's trial Lord Salisbury thus expressed himself: "I have taken paines in my nowne heart to clear my lord's offences, which now have leade me from the contemplation of his virtues; for I knowe him vertuous, wyse, valiaunte, and of use and ornamente to the state.... The cause of this combustion was the papistes seekinge to restore their religion. Non libens dico, sed res ipsa loquitur."—Hawarde,Les Reportes, etc.
[436]History, vii. 84, note. On this subject Mr. Sawyer, the editor of Winwood (1715), has the following remark: "We meet with some account of his [Northumberland's] offence, though couched in such tender terms, that 'tis a little difficult to conceive it deserved so heavy a punishment as a fine of £30,000 and perpetual imprisonment." (Memorials, iii. 287, note.)
[437]To Winwood,Memorials, iii. 287.
[438]Traditional Memoirs, p. 214.
[439]An Answere to certaine Scandalous Papers, scattered abroad under colour of a Catholicke Admonition."Qui facit vivere, docet orare." Imprinted at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the King's most Eccellent Majestie. Anno 1606.
This was published in January, 1605-6, on the 28th of which month Sir W. Browne, writing from Flushing, mentions that "my lord of Salisbury hath lately published a little booke as a kynd of answer to som secrett threatning libelling letters cast into his chamber." (Stowe MSS., 168, 74, f. 308.)
[440]On this subject Cornwallis wrote to Salisbury (Winwood, ii. 193): "Many reports are here spread of the Combination against your Lordship, and that five English Romanists would resolve your death. It seems that since they cannot be allowedSacrificium incruentum, they will now altogether put in use their sacrifices of blood. But I hope and suppose that their hearts and their hands want much of the vigour that rests in their wills and their pens. Your Lordship doth take especial courage in this, that they single you out as the chief and principal watch Tower of your Country and Commonwealth, and turn the strength of their malice to you whom they hold the discoverer of all their unnatural and destructive inventions against their prince and country," etc.
[441]P.R.O.Dom. James I.xviii. 97, February 27th, N.S., 1606. The original, which is in Latin, has been utterly misunderstood by the Calendarer of State Papers.
[442]Stonyhurst MSS.,Anglia, iii. 72.
[443]Thomas Howard, cr. 1603.
[444]To the ambassadors.
[445]Father Blount's account is undoubtedly in keeping with what we know of the Earl, and especially of his Countess, who was a sister of Sir Thomas Knyvet, the captor of Guy Faukes. Suffolk, in 1614, became Lord High Treasurer, but four years afterwards grave irregularities were discovered in his office; he was accused of embezzlement and extortion, in which work his wife was proved to have been even more active than himself. They were sentenced to restore all money wrongfully extorted, to a fine of £30,000, and to imprisonment during pleasure.
[446]In this letter all proper names are in cipher, as well as various other words.
[447]Church History, x. 40.
[448]We have four Latin epigrams of Milton's,In proditionem Bombardicam, which, though pointless, are bitterly anti-Catholic. A longer poem, of 226 lines,In quintum Novembris, is still more virulent.
It is somewhat remarkable that the universal Shakespeare should make no allusion to the Plot, beyond the doubtful reference to equivocation inMacbeth(ii. 3). He was at the time of its occurrence in the full flow of his dramatic activity.
[449]See Appendix L,Myths and Legends of the Powder Plot.
[450]Brit. Mus. Print Room, Crace Collection, portf. xv. 28. This is reproduced, as our frontispiece.
[451]There was a new moon at 11.30 p.m. on October 31st.
[452]The reasons assigned in the proclamation for this prorogation are plainly insufficient: viz., "That the holding of it [the Parliament] so soone is not convenient, as well for that the ordinary course of our subjects resorting to the citie for their usuall affaires at the Terme is not for the most part till Allhallowtide or thereabouts." Why, then, had the meeting been fixed for so unsuitable a date?
[453]November 7th, 1605. (Dom. James I.)
[454]Tanner MSS. lxxv. 44.
[455]Ibid.
[456]On his arrival in England, as Osborne tells us (Memoirs, p. 276), King James "brought a new holiday into the Church of England, wherein God had publick thanks given him for his majestie's deliverance out of the hands of Earle Goury;" but the introduction was not a success, Englishmen and Scots alike ridiculing it. Gunpowder Plot Day was more fortunate.
[457]Harleian Miscellany, iv. 251.
Fromthe Crace Collection, British Museum,Portf.xv. 20. Thus described in the catalogue of the collection:
"A small etching of the House of Lords. Guy Fawkes in the foreground. W.E. exc. 1605."
This plate is of exceptional interest as having been executed within five months of the discovery of the Plot,i.e., previously to March 25th, 1606, the first day of the year, Old Style.
Guy Faukes is represented as approaching the House of Commons (St. Stephen's Chapel), not the House of Lords, as the catalogue says.
Obverse, or reverse, of a medal struck, by order of the Dutch senate, to commemorate the double event of the discovery of the Gunpowder Plot and the expulsion of the Jesuits from Holland. Drawn from a copy of the medal in pewter, by Paul Woodroffe. The design here exhibited is thus described in Hawkins and Frank'sMedallic Illustrations:
"The name of Jehovah, in Hebrew, radiate, within a crown of thorns.
"Legend, chronogrammatic,
Non DorMItastI AntIstes IaCobI"
Non DorMItastI AntIstes IaCobI"
[which gives the date 1605]
On its other face the medal bears a snake gliding amid roses and lilies [symbolizing Jesuit intrigues in England and France], with the legendDetectus qui latuit. S.C.[Senatus Consulto]."
This is reproduced on the cover.
From a print published at Amsterdam.
Eight conspirators are represented, five being omitted, viz., Grant, Keyes, Digby, Rokewood, and Tresham.
Bates, as a servant, wears no hat.
Restored from the best authorities, and drawn for the author by H.W. Brewer.
Extracted from the "Foundation plan of the Ancient Palace of Westminster; measured, drawn and engraved by J.T. Smith" (Antiquities of Westminster, p. 125)
From J.T. Smith'sAntiquities of Westminster.
This sketch, made from the east, or river, side, was taken during the demolition of the buildings erectedagainst the sides of the Parliament House. These were put up previously to the time when Hollar made his drawing of the interior (temp. Charles II.), which shows the walls hung with tapestry, the windows having been blocked up.
According to a writer in theGentleman's Magazine(No. 70, July, 1800), who signs himself "Architect," in a print of the time of James I. the tapestry is not seen, and the House "appears to have preserved much of its original work." The only print answering to this description which I have been able to find exhibits the windows, but is of no value for historical purposes, as it is a reproduction of one of the time of Queen Elizabeth, the figure of the sovereign alone being changed. This engraving is said to be "taken from a painted print in the Cottonian Library," of which I can find no trace. [B. Mus., K. 24. 19. b.]
To the left of our illustration is seen the gable of the Prince's Chamber. The door to the right of this opened into the cellar, and by it, according to tradition, Faukes was to have made his exit.
In front of this is seen part of the garden attached to Percy's lodging.
Two views of the interior of the "cellar," drawn by H.W. Brewer, from elevations in J.T. Smith'sAntiquities of Westminster, p. 39.
The remains of a buttery-hatch, at the southern end, testify to the ancient use of the chamber as the palace kitchen; of which the Earl of Northampton made mention at Father Garnet's trial.
The very ancient doorway in the eastern wall, seen on the left of the picture, was of Saxon workmanship, and, like the foundations beneath, probably dated from the time of Edward the Confessor, who first erected this portion of the palace, most of which had been rebuilt about the time of Henry III. By this doorway, according to some accounts, Faukes intended to escape after firing the train, though others assign this distinction to one near the other end.
These two illustrations were originally prepared for theDaily Graphicof November 5th, 1894, and it is by the courtesy of the proprietors of that journal that they are here reproduced.
From Brayley and Britton'sPalace of Westminster, p. 247.
This has been constantly depicted and described as "Guy Faukes' Cellar."
Drawn for the author by H.W. Brewer.
Sir John Soane, who in 1823 took down the old House of Lords, removed the arches from the "cellar" beneath it, to his own house in Lincoln's Inn Fields, now the Soane Museum, where they are still to be seen in a small court adjoining the building. They do not, however, appear to have been set up precisely in their original form, being dwarfed by the omission of some stones, presumably that they might occupy less space. In our illustration they are represented exactly as theynow stand, with the modern building behind them. Some incongruous relics of other stonework which have been introduced amongst them have, however, been omitted.
The architecture of these arches, and of the adjacent Prince's Chamber, assigns them to the best period of thirteenth century Gothic.
Often styled "Guy Faukes' Cell."
From Brayley and Britton,op. cit., p. 360.
There appears to be no reason for associating this with Faukes.
"Invented by Samuel Ward, Preacher, of Ipswich. Imprinted at Amsterdam, 1621." [British Museum,Political and Personal Satires, i. 41.]
This is the portion to the right of a composition representing on the left the Spanish Armada, and in the centre a council table at which are gathered the Devil, the Pope, the King of Spain, the General of the Jesuits, and others. An eye above is fixed on the cellar. Faukes in this case is going to blow up the Painted Chamber.
This plate represents the House in the reign of George II. In the century and a half since the time of the Powder Plot it is probable that the windowsin the side walls had been blocked up, and the tapestry hung. The latter represented the defeat of the Armada.
[From Maitland'sLondon(1756), ii. 1340.]
FromMischeefes Mystery.
King James enthroned, with crown and sceptre, upon a daïs, at the foot of which stands the Earl of Salisbury. An eagle bears a letter in its beak, to receive which the king and his minister extend their left hands.
The English poem, by John Vicars, embellished with this woodcut, was published in 1617, being a much expanded version of one in Latin hexameters, entitledPietas Pontificia, by Francis Herring, which appeared in 1606.
FromMischeefes Mystery.
Guy Faukes booted and spurred, and with his lantern, prepares to open a door at the extremity of the Painted Chamber. Sir Thomas Knyvet with his retinue approaches unseen. The stars and the beams from the lantern show that it is the middle of the night.
From a print in the Guildhall Library.
Catesby, Faukes, and Garnet (the latter in what is apparently meant for the Jesuit habit) stand in themiddle of the street conspiring secretly. Through the open door of the "cellar" the powder barrels are seen.
This illustration (without the coins) stands at the head of Book XVIII. of M. Rapin de Thoyras'History of England, translated by N. Tindal.
Drawn by H.W. Brewer.
This object, the authenticity of which is not unquestionable, is exhibited in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. It bears the inscription, "Laterna illa ipsa qua usus est, et cum qua deprehensus Guido Faux in crypta subterranea ubi domo Parliamenti difflandæ operam dabat. Ex dono Robti Heywood nuper Academiae Procuratoris, Ap. 4o, 1641."
It will be remembered that the honour of having arrested Faukes has been claimed for one of the name of Heywood.
The history of the famous lantern has not escaped the variations which we are accustomed to meet with on other points. Faukes is generally said to have been found with it in his hands, and it has consequently become an inseparable adjunct in pictures of him. On the other hand, we are told, "In a corner, behind the door, was a dark lantern containing a light" (Brayley and Britton,Palace of Westminster, p. 377).
From Grainger.
Around the portrait are four small engravings representing:
A portion of the copy of Winter's confession, in the handwriting of Levinus Munck, Lord Salisbury's private secretary, and dated November 23rd. In the margin is a note in the handwriting of King James, objecting to a certain "uncleare phrase," which has been altered in accordance with the royal wish. In the printed version it appears in the amended form.
Three signatures of Faukes (November 9th, 1605), and three of Father Edward Oldcorne (March 6th, 1605-6), at different stages of the same examination.
A portion of this confession, in which Faukes speaks of the oath taken by the conspirators and of their reception of the sacrament at the hands of Father John Gerard, adding, however, that "Gerard was not acquainted with their purpose." The last clause has been marked for omission by Sir Edward Coke who has written in the marginhucusq. ("thus far").
The letter B in the margin is also inserted by Coke,who habitually indicated by such letters which portions of the depositions were to be read in court and which omitted, all being always suppressed which told in any way in favour of the accused.
The document is written by a clerk, and signed by Faukes at the foot of each page.
This is taken from a large plate [British Museum,Political and Personal Satires, i. 67], of which only the lower portion is here reproduced. At the top is the inscription:
The Powder Treason, Propounded by Sathan, Approved by Anti-Christ, Enterprised by Papists, Practized by Traitors, Reveled by an Eagle, Expounded by an Oracle.—Founded in Hell, Confounded in Heaven.
Beneath are many emblematical devices.
In the portion here exhibited, King James is seen on his throne with Lords and Commons before him. Under the floor is a diminutive figure of Faukes with an ample store of barrels. At the bottom, in the left hand corner, some of the conspirators receive the sacrament from Father Gerard: on the right they are executed. On a lunette are the thirteen conspirators, with the arch-traitor Garnet in the centre, the band being described as "The Pope's Saltpeeter Saints." Within the lunette are the Jesuits in Hell.
This is the portion on the left of a composite picture [British Museum,Political and PersonalSatires, 63], on the right being represented the catastrophe known as the "Blackfriars Downfall." On Sunday, October 26th, 1623, many Catholics having assembled in an upper room of the French ambassador's house, in Blackfriars, to hear a sermon from the Jesuit, Father Drury, the floor collapsed, and many, including the preacher, were killed. As October 26th, O.S., corresponded to November 5th, N.S., it was ingeniously discovered that the accident was meant to signalize Gunpowder Plot day, though this fell on November 5th, O.S., or November 15th, N.S.
In our illustration the Parliament House is represented by a nondescript edifice, the wall of which is partially removed, showing King James and some of the Peers. An oven-like vault beneath represents the "cellar," well stored with barrels, which Faukes is preparing to light with a torch fanned by a crowned fiend with a pair of bellows. A company of halberdiers approaches under the guidance of an angel. In the background is a royal funeral procession.
A Latin inscription is attached which runs thus:
"Anno 1623, Quinto Novembris, eo scripto die quo Angliæ Parliamentum, ao1605, proditione et insidiis Jesuitarum, pulvere nitreo inflammari et in æthera spargi debuit, Jesuitarum conventus Londini, ... ad missam et conciones audiendas congregatus, fatali providentia, ædium ruina præcipitatus et dissipatus est, oppressis centum et plus totidem vulneratis.
"Anno 1623, Quinto Novembris, eo scripto die quo Angliæ Parliamentum, ao1605, proditione et insidiis Jesuitarum, pulvere nitreo inflammari et in æthera spargi debuit, Jesuitarum conventus Londini, ... ad missam et conciones audiendas congregatus, fatali providentia, ædium ruina præcipitatus et dissipatus est, oppressis centum et plus totidem vulneratis.
Loiolides sanctos efflare volebat ad astra;Astra repercutiunt fulmine Loiolidem.Loiolides, sine te penetrabit astra fidelis:Tu fato ad Stygias præcipitaris aquas."
Loiolides sanctos efflare volebat ad astra;Astra repercutiunt fulmine Loiolidem.Loiolides, sine te penetrabit astra fidelis:Tu fato ad Stygias præcipitaris aquas."
This is an edition of Samuel Ward's print described above, improved and embellished by a "Transmariner" in 1689. [British Museum,Political and Personal Satires, i. 43.]
The tent in which the council table stands is ornamented at the four corners with figures of a wolf, a parrot, an owl, and a dragon: a cockatrice is on the table; on the top lie a gun, a sword, and a brace of pistols. A demon, bearing behind him a Papal Bull, accompanies Faukes, beneath whose lantern, as a play on his name, is writtenFax. At the door of the cellar are scorpions and a serpent. On the top of the barrels within are seen the "yron barres," placed there to make the breach the greater.
Itseems to have been always assumed that this celebrated letter, which is undated, was written after the failure of the Gunpowder Plot, and the consequent arrest of Sir Everard, and doubtless to some extent internal evidence supports this view, as the writer speaks of himself as deserving punishment, and of "our offence." It is, moreover, clear that the letter, which is undated, cannot have been written before May 4th, 1605, the date of Cecil's earldom. On the other hand, the whole tone of the document appears utterly inconsistent with the supposition that it waswritten by one branded with the stigma of such a crime as the Powder Plot. Some of the expressions used, especially in the opening sentence, appear, likewise, incompatible with such a supposition, and the letter bears the usual form of address for those sent in ordinary course of post, "To the Right Hon. the Earl of Salisburie give these"; it has moreover been sealed with a crest or coat-of-arms; all of which is quite unlike a document prepared by a prisoner for those who had him under lock and key. It is noteworthy, too, that at the trial, according to the testimony of the official account itself, on the very subject of the treatment of Catholics, Salisbury acknowledged "that Sir E. Digby was his ally."
It seems probable, therefore, that the letter was written before Digby had been entangled by Catesby in the conspiracy (i.e., between May and September, 1605). If so, what was the "offence" of which he speaks? The answer to this question would throw an interesting light on this perplexed history. The following is Sir Everard's letter:
"Right Honourable, I have better reflected on your late speeches than at the present I could do, both for the small stay which I made, and for my indisposition that day, not being very well, and though perhaps your Lordship may judge me peremptory in meddling, and idle in propounding, yet the desire I have to establish the King in safety will not suffer me to be silent."
"One part of your Lordship's speech (as I remember) was that the King could not get so much from the Pope (even then when his Majesty had done nothing against Catholics) as a promise that he wouldnot excommunicate him, so long as that mild course was continued, wherefore it gave occasion to suspect, that if Catholics were suffered to increase, the Pope might afterwards proceed to excommunication, if the King would not change his religion. But to take away that doubt, I do assure myself that his Holiness may be drawn to manifest so contrary a disposition of excommunicating the King, that he will proceed with the same course against all such as shall go about to disturb the King's quiet and happy reign; and the willingness of Catholics, especially of priests and Jesuits, is such as I dare undertake to procure any priest in England (though it were the Superior of the Jesuits) to go himself to Rome to negotiate this business, and that both he and all other religious men (till the Pope's pleasure be known) shall take any spiritual course to stop the effect that may proceed from any discontented or despairing Catholic."
"And I doubt not but his return would bring both assurance that such course should not be taken with the King, and that it should be performed against any that should seek to disturb him for religion. If this were done, there could then be no cause to fear any Catholic, and this may be done only with those proceedings (which as I understood your lordship) should be used. If your Lordship apprehend it to be worth the doing, I shall be glad to be the instrument, for no hope to put off from myself any punishment, but only that I wish safety to the King and ease to Catholics. If your Lordship and the State think it fit to deal severely with Catholics, within brief there will be massacres, rebellions, and desperate attempts against the King and State. For it is a general received reasonamongst Catholics, that there is not that expecting and suffering course now to be run that was in the Queen's time, who was the last of her line, and last in expectance to run violent courses against Catholics; for then it was hoped that the King that now is would have been at least free from persecuting, as his promise was before his coming into this realm, and as divers his promises have been since his coming, saying that he would take no soul money nor blood. Also, as it appeared, was the whole body of the Council's pleasure, when they sent for divers of the better sort of Catholics (as Sir Thos. Tressam and others) and told them it was the King's pleasure to forgive the payment of Catholics, so long as they should carry themselves dutifully and well. All these promises every man sees broken, and to thrust them further in despair, most Catholics take note of a vehement book written by Mr. Attorney, whose drift (as I have heard) is to prove that the only being a Catholic is to be a traitor, which book coming forth, after the breach of so many promises, and before the ending of such a violent parliament, can work no less effect in men's minds than a belief that every Catholic will be brought within that compass before the King and State have done with them. And I know, as the priest himself told me, that if he had not hindered there had somewhat been attempted, before our offence, to give ease to Catholics. But being so safely prevented, and so necessary to avoid, I doubt not but your Lordship and the rest of the Lords will think of a more mild and undoubted safe course, in which I will undertake the performance of what I have promised and as much as can be expected, and when I have done, I shall be aswilling to die as I am ready to offer my service, and expect not nor desire favour for it, either before the doing it, nor in the doing it, nor after it is done, but refer myself to the resolved course for me. So, leaving to trouble your Lordship any further, I humbly take my leave. Your Lordship's poor bedesman,Ev. Digby."
Addressed"To the Right Honourable the Earl of Salisburie give these."
Sealed.[P.R.O.Dom. James I.xvii. 10.]