Hepburne, Daglace, Peuory, to John Hey, mad up the nesse, Which fowre when they weare put to death the treason did confesse; And sayd that Murray, Moreton to, with others of ther rowte Were guyltie of the murder vyl though nowe they loke full stowte. Yet some perchaunce doo thinke that I speake for affection heare, Though I would so, thre thousan can hearin trew witness beare Who present weare as well as I at thexecution tyme & hard how these in conscience pricte confessed who did the cryme.[320] A number of Acts and other public papers were then read; ‘the whole lying altogether on the council table, were one after another showed, rather “by hap” as they lay on the table than by any choice of their natures, as it might had there been time.’ Mr. Henderson argues, as against Hosack, Schiern, and Skelton, that this phrase applies only to the proceedings of December 15, not to the examination of the Casket Letters. This seems more probable, though it might be argued, from the prolepsis about reading the ‘Book of Articles’ on the 14th, that the minutes of both days were written together, on the second day, and that the hugger-mugger described applies to the work of both days. This is unimportant; every one must see that the examination of handwriting was too hasty to be critical. The assembled nobles were then told that Elizabeth did not think she _could_ let Mary ‘come into her presence,’ while unpurged of all these horrible crimes. The Earls all agreed that her Majesty’s delicacy of feeling, ‘as the case now did stand,’ was worthy of her, and so ended the farce.[321] Mr. Froude, on the authority (apparently) of a Simancas MS., tells us that ‘at first only four--Cecil, Sadleyr, Leicester, and Bacon--declared themselves convinced.’[322] Lingard quotes a Simancas MS. saying that the nobles ‘showed some heart, and checked a little the terrible fury with which Cecil sought to ruin’ Mary.[323] Camden (writing under James VI.) says that Sussex, Arundel, Clinton, and Norfolk thought that Mary had a right to be heard in person. But Elizabeth held this advantage: Mary would not acknowledge her as a judge: she must therefore admit Mary to her presence, if she admitted her at all, _not_ as a culprit. Elizabeth (who probably forgot Amy Robsart’s affair) deemed herself too good and pure to see, not as a prisoner at the Bar, a lady of dubious character. Thus all was well. Mary was firmly discredited (though after all most of the nobles presently approved of her marriage to Norfolk), yet she could not plead her cause in person. XIII _MARY’S ATTITUDE AFTER THE CONFERENCE_