I have shown that treachery weakened the cause of James; I am sorry to say, that falsehood was employed in support of William. Two genuine Declarations were published in his cause; a third appeared, of the most violent description. It stated as his resolution, that all Papists found with arms on their persons or in their houses, should be treated as freebooters and banditti, be incapable of quarter, and be delivered up to the discretion of his soldiers; all persons assisting them were to be looked upon as partakers of their crimes. It stated, also, that numerous Papists had of late resorted to London and Westminster; that there was reason to suspect they did so, not for their own security, but in order to make a desperate attempt upon those places; and that French troops, procured by the interest and power of the Jesuits, would, if possible, land in England, in “pursuance of the engagements which, at the instigation of that pestilent Society, His most Christian Majesty, with one of his neighbouring Princes of the same communion, had entered into, for the utter extirpation of the Protestant religion out of Europe.”[67] Burnet, who was in the secrets of the Prince’s Court, observes, “No doubt was made that it was truly the Prince’s Declaration; but he knew nothing of it; and it was never known who was the author of so bold a thing. No person ever claimed the merit of it, for though it had an amazing effect, yet, it seems he that contrived it apprehended that the Prince would not be well pleased with the author of such an imposture in his name. The King was under such a consternation, that he neither knew what to resolve on, nor whom to trust.”[68] It has been said[69] that the Declaration was not made public until after the Prince had left Sherborne. William did not issue any counter Declaration nor publish any repudiation of the document, but left it to produce its effect. Such a want of straightforwardness contradicts his general character, but most likely those about him, seeing how effective the Declaration proved, prevented its being cancelled; still, if the main blame rests with them, their master remains responsible for having at least winked at the maxim of doing evil that good might come. Years afterwards one Speke--who had been in the Prince’s army, and who was goaded by revenge for his brother’s death under Judge Jeffreys--avowed himself the fabricator of the infamous device, and said that he gave it to the Prince with his own hand at Sherborne Castle; that His Highness seemed somewhat surprised at first, but that when he had considered it, he and those about him were not displeased. No credit can be given to a man who played the part which Speke confessed he had done. Part of his statement is improbable, and is contradicted by the relation of circumstances given by Bishop Burnet. At all events, the effect of the forgery was terrible, and soon afterwards this same man contrived another and still more diabolical scheme.