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
The case still dragged on its weary length. Numerous other witnesses
were called to prove and disprove points of varying importance and
connection with the matter at issue. All the prisoners against whom
Oates and Bedloe had sworn made long speeches and discoursed on a
hundred irrelevant topics. Marshal, the Benedictine, lectured the court
and delivered an impassioned harangue on the injustice of the English
nation and on the future state. He was stopped and, beginning again,
drew down on himself from Scroggs a violent rebuke in which he declared
his belief that it was possible for an atheist to be a papist, but
hardly for a knowing Christian to be a Christian and a papist. When the
heated wrangle which followed was ended, the Chief Justice summed up,
setting the evidence on both sides in a clear light and pointing out
where its strength lay against the prisoners, but plainly intimating
his opinion that the revelation made by Sir Philip Lloyd went far to
invalidate Oates’ testimony. As the jury were leaving the box Bedloe
broke in: “My lord, my evidence is not right summed up.” “I know not
by what authority this man speaks,” said Scroggs sternly. After the
absence of about an hour the jury returned. Might they, they asked,
find the prisoners guilty of misprision of treason? “No,” replied
Jeffreys, the Recorder, “you must either convict them of high treason
or acquit them.” “Then take a verdict,” said the foreman; and returned
a verdict of not guilty for all the prisoners.
Scarcely was the trial over when a storm broke upon the head of the
Lord Chief Justice. He had already earned the hatred of the ferocious
London mob by accepting bail for Mr. Pepys and Sir Anthony Deane, who
were in prison on account of the Plot.[700] Now the feeling against
him amounted to positive fury. Sir George Wakeman, after visiting
the queen at Windsor, fled the country to escape the effects of the
popular rage.[701] Scroggs stood his ground. The London presses
teemed with pamphlets against him. _Some observations upon the late
trials of Sir George Wakeman_, etc., by Tom Ticklefoot; _The Tickler
Tickled_; _A New Year’s Gift for the Lord Chief in Justice_ are among
those which deserve to be remembered for their especial virulence.
The Portuguese ambassador had the egregious folly to call publicly
upon Scroggs the day after the trial and to thank him for his conduct
of the case.[702] It was immediately said that the Chief Justice had
been bribed. A barrel packed with gold had been sent to him. “Great
store of money” had been scattered about. The jury had been bribed.
A good jury had been impanelled, but was never summoned, and a set
of rascals was chosen in its place.[703] When Scroggs went on circuit
for the autumn assizes he was met in the provinces with cries of—A
Wakeman, a Wakeman; and at one place a half-dead dog was thrown into
his coach.[704] Early in the year following Oates and Bedloe exhibited
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