The Popish Plot: A study in the history of the reign of Charles IIPollock, John
History
The Popish Plot: A study in the history of the reign of Charles II
Pollock, John
Popish Plot, 1678
his favour, his word on the point is the more deserving of credit.
If Prance himself was a party to the murder he must have known
the real authors of it. He must have accused the innocent not from
necessity but from choice, and in order to conceal the guilty. As he
was expected and supposed to corroborate Bedloe’s evidence, his most
natural course was to introduce into his story all those whom Bedloe
had named. He carefully avoided mentioning any of them. No other reason
is conceivable except that he knew Bedloe to have exposed the real
murderers, and that he wished to shield them. What then was the motive
of the crime, and how did this extraordinary complication arise?
CHAPTER V
THE SECRET
Sir Edmund Berry Godfrey was an intimate friend of Edward Coleman,
secretary to the Duchess of York. At the time of the murder Coleman
lay in Newgate under an accusation of treason, and had so lain for
a fortnight. He was therefore never examined on the subject of his
friend’s death. The omission was unfortunate, for Coleman could
probably have thrown some light upon the nature of the magistrate’s
end.[269] It was constantly said, and the statement has often been
repeated, that when Oates left a copy of his information with Godfrey
on September 27, Godfrey at once wrote to Coleman an account of the
charges contained in it to give the Duke of York warning of the coming
storm.[270] The story was extensively used by those who wished to prove
that Godfrey had been murdered by the supporters of the Plot, or that
he had committed suicide from fear of a parliamentary inquiry into his
conduct. He had not only this reason for fear, urged L’Estrange, but he
had concealed the fact of Oates’ discovery to him for nearly a whole
month; this was the meaning of Godfrey’s enigmatical expressions of
apprehension, and his fear, combined with constitutional melancholy,
drove him to take his own life.[271] Whether or no he suffered from
depression is not a question of importance, since it has been proved
that he did not commit suicide, but was murdered. The rest of the
argument is equally unsound. When Godfrey took Oates’ first deposition
on September 6, he had no copy of the information left with him and
knew that it had already been communicated to the government.[272] As
for the fact that Godfrey had sent an account of Oates’ revelations
to the Duke of York, it would be absurd to suppose that plans of
vengeance were harboured against him on this score, for the duke had
been acquainted with the matter since August 31, when the forged
letters were sent to Bedingfield at Windsor, so that the information
he received from Godfrey was unimportant.[273] As this was a fact of
which the Lord Treasurer was perfectly aware, the suggestions of North
and Warner, the Jesuit provincial, that Godfrey had been threatened and
finally dispatched by order of Danby, on account of his officiousness
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