The Gunpowder Plot and Lord Mounteagle's Letter, Being a Proof, with Moral Certitude, of the Authorship of the Document: Together with Some Account of the Whole Thirteen Gunpowder Conspirators, Including Guy FawkesSpink, Henry
History
The Gunpowder Plot and Lord Mounteagle's Letter, Being a Proof, with Moral Certitude, of the Authorship of the Document: Together with Some Account of the Whole Thirteen Gunpowder Conspirators, Including Guy Fawkes
Spink, Henry
Gunpowder Plot, 1605; Monteagle, William Parker, Baron, 1574 or 1575-1622
The learned David Jardine——to whom all students of the Gunpowder Plot will
be for ever indebted for his labours in this conspiracy of
conspiracies——in his “_Narrative_,” published in the year 1857, and to
which reference has been already frequently made in the course of this
Inquiry, says,[116] “No contemporary writer alludes to Mrs. Abington as
the author of the Letter.”
And Jardine evidently does not think that the penmanship of the document
can be brought home to this lady.
Moreover, if Mrs. Abington had written the Letter of Letters, surely she
would have, at least, _shared_ her brother Lord Mounteagle’s reward, which
was £700 a year for life, equal to nearly £7,000 a year in our money.
For if £700 a year was the guerdon of _him_ that _merely delivered_ this
Letter of Letters, what should have been the guerdon of _her_ that
actually _penned_ the peerless treasure?
But the hypothesis that Mrs. Abington penned the Letter of Letters has
absolutely no foundation in contemporary evidence. For there is not the
faintest echo of an echo of testimony, nor the merest shadow of a shade of
proof that _either_ she _or_ Mr. Abington had the remotest previous
knowledge of the Gunpowder Treason Plot.
And the mere fact that Mr. Abington, although the harbourer of Fathers
Garnet and Oldcorne, was spared from undergoing the extreme penalty of the
law, in itself tends to disprove the allegation that either he or his wife
had been in any way privy to the Plot. For no plotter’s life was spared.
Mr. Abington became a celebrated antiquary, especially in regard to his
own County of Worcestershire, within the confines of which he was ordered
by the King to remain for the rest of his days.——See Jardine’s
“_Narrative_,” p. 212.[A]
[Footnote A: The splendid Elizabethan mansion known as Hindlip Hall, four
miles from Worcester, with a large and magnificent prospect of the
surrounding country, was demolished early in the nineteenth century. A
picture of this mansion is in the Rev. Ethelred Taunton’s book, “_The
Jesuits in England_” (Methuen & Co.). The present Hindlip Hall is the seat
of the Lord Hindlip.]
In these circumstances, Dr. Nash’s alleged tradition cannot possibly
outweigh the inferences that the facts known and inferred concerning the
Plot all tend to establish. For these inferences, both in respect of what
happened _before and after_ the penning of the Letter, all go to show
this: that the conjectures, surmises, and suggestions of this Essay are
indeed probable to the degree of moral certitude.
And I respectfully submit these same conjectures, surmises, and
suggestions cannot be upset, still less broken, by knowledge commensurate
with zeal.
Jardine mentions the singular hypothesis that this famous Letter was
penned by the Honourable Anne Vaux, at the dictation of the Honourable
Mrs. Abington.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account