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
But there was one particular in
which knowledge of Oates’ perjury might be very dangerous indeed.
No doubt Coleman pointed out Oates’ long tale of lies through many
articles of his deposition. There was one which he certainly would not
omit. The cardinal point in the Plot, according to Oates’ revelation,
was a Jesuit congregation held on April 24, 1678 at the White Horse
Tavern in the Strand, where means were concerted for the king’s
assassination. At all the trials of the Jesuits Oates came forward to
give evidence to this point. It was of the first importance. Oates’
statement was false. No congregation had met on that day at the White
Horse Tavern. His perjury is more easy to prove here than in most other
particulars, for it is certain that the Jesuit congregation was held
on April 24 in a different place. It was held at St. James’ Palace,
the residence of the Duke of York. More than five years afterwards
James II let out the secret to Sir John Reresby.[279] Up to that
time it had been well guarded. It was of the utmost consequence that
the fact should not be known. Had it been discovered, the discredit
into which Oates would have fallen would have been of little moment
compared to the extent of the gain to the Whig and Protestant party.
To Shaftesbury the knowledge would have meant everything. Witnesses of
the fact would certainly have been forthcoming, and James’ reception
of the Jesuits in his home was a formal act of high treason. The
Exclusion bill would have been unnecessary. James would have been
successfully impeached and would have been lucky to escape with his
head upon his shoulders. Charles would hardly have been able to
withstand the outcry for the recognition of the Protestant duke as
heir to the throne, the Revolution would never have come to pass, and
the English throne might to this day support a bastard Stuart line
instead of the legitimate Hanoverian dynasty. Besides the Duke of York
and the Jesuit party one man only was acquainted with this stupendous
fact. It is hardly credible that Godfrey met Coleman on September 28,
1678 with any other object than to discuss with him the charges made
by Oates. Still less is it credible that Coleman failed to point out
Oates’ perjury in this matter. It need not be supposed that a definite
statement passed from him. A hint would have sufficed. In some way,
it may be conjectured, Coleman disclosed to the magistrate that which
he should have concealed. Such understandings are abrupt in origin
but swift in growth. Beyond doubt the secret, the shadow of which
Godfrey saw stretching across the line of his life, was that the Jesuit
congregation of April 24 had been held in the house and under the
patronage of the Duke of York.[280]
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