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
[Footnote D: Of course the Gunpowder Treason Plot was a “sacrilegious
crime,” because it sought to compass the death of a king who was “one of
the Lord’s anointed,” _as well as_ because of the unlawful oath of
secrecy, solemnly ratified by the reception of the Sacrament at the hands
of some priest in a house behind St. Clement’s Inn, “near the principal
street in London called the Strand.”——See “_The Confessions of Thomas
Winter and Guy Fawkes_.” This house was probably the London lodging of
Father John Gerard, S.J. Winter and Fawkes said that the conspirators
received the Sacrament at the hands of Gerard. But “Gerard was not
acquainted with their purpose,” said Fawkes. Gerard denied having given
the conspirators the Sacrament.——See Gardiner’s “_What Gunpowder Plot
was_,” p. 44. One vested priest is very much like another, just as one
soldier in uniform is very much like another. So Fawkes and Winter may
have been mistaken. Besides, they would not be likely to be minutely
examining the features of a priest on such an occasion.]
Furthermore; that it was _because_ of the possession by Hammond of this
happy intelligence, early on that Thursday morning, before sunrise, that
_therefore_, in the Tribunal of Penance, “he absolved” poor, miserable
(yet contrite) Ambrose Rookwood “for all in general”——“without any other
circumstances.”
That is, I take it, without reproaching or even chiding him——in fact
“without remark.”[A]
[Footnote A: Father Nicholas Hart (alias Hammond) appears to have been
stationed with the Vauxes, of Great Harrowden, usually. Foley (iv., Index)
thinks it probable that the Father Singleton, S.J. (alias Clifton),
mentioned by Henry Hurlston, Esquire, or Huddlestone, of the Huddlestones,
of Suwston Hall, near Cambridge; Faringdon Hall, near Preston, in
Lancashire; and Millom, “North of the Sands,” was in reality Father
Nicholas Hart (alias Hammond). I do not think so. For, according to the
Evidence of Henry Hurlston (Foley’s “_Records_,” vol. iv., pp. 10, 11),
who was at Great Harrowden, on Tuesday, November 5th, at five o’clock in
the afternoon, Father Strange, S.J. (a cousin of Mr. Abington, of
Hindlip), and this said Father Singleton, “by Thursday morning took their
horses and intended to have ridden to Grote.” They were apprehended at
Kenilworth. This Father Singleton is a mysterious personage whose “future”
I should like to follow up. Was he the same as a certain “Dr. Singleton”
who figures in the “_Life of Mary Ward_” vol. i., p. 443? and was he of
the Catholic Singletons, of Singleton, near Blackpool?]
CHAPTER XLII.
The other piece of Evidence that I wish to bring before my readers which
tends to show that it was _one of the conspirators themselves that
revealed the Plot_ is this:——
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