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
Oates and Tonge now planned a bolder stroke. On August 30 Danby
received news from Tonge, for Oates was at this time still unknown
to him, that letters telling of treasonable designs had been sent to
Father Bedingfield, the Duke of York’s Jesuit confessor, and might
be intercepted at the Windsor post-office. Danby instantly returned
to Windsor and showed Tonge’s letter to the king. He was met by the
announcement that Bedingfield had already been at the post-office.
The confessor had found a packet awaiting him. It contained four
letters, ostensibly from priests of his order known to him but not
in their hands, and a fifth in the same style. All were apparently
of dangerous concern, full of mysterious phrases which seemed of no
good meaning. Bedingfield took the letters to the duke, who showed
them to the king. Thus when Danby arrived at Windsor his news was
stale. Charles believed still less in the existence of a real plot.
The letters were transparent forgeries. Purporting to be written by
different persons, from different places, at different dates, they bore
a curious likeness one to another. The paper on which they were written
bore the same watermark and appeared to have been cut from one sheet.
In every case the name signed was misspelt. Throughout, the writing
was disfigured by the same blemishes of style and spelling. Only one
of the letters contained a single stop, and that seemed to have been
made accidentally. Oates professed afterwards that the handwriting was
disguised and that the writers made mistakes on purpose, should the
letters be intercepted, to lull the reader to false security. A Jesuit
in London, who scented the discovery of the plot, had sent warning to
Bedingfield, and the confessor had handed his letters to the duke with
the express intention of showing them to be counterfeit and himself
to be innocent. Thus, declared the informer with indignation, they
had been made to appear the work of forgery. So far as the last goes,
Oates spoke the truth. They were patently the composition of himself
and his confederate. A tribute to the unscrupulous energy of those who
adopted the plot for political purposes is paid by the fact that these
letters were suppressed and never brought forward as evidence, although
three of the men who were supposed to have written them were afterwards
tried for treasons of which, had they been genuine, the letters would
have afforded strong proof. Oates met the rebuff by going at Kirkby’s
instigation to swear to the truth of his story before a London
magistrate. But at court the intriguers were badly received. Kirkby
and Tonge called several times on the Treasurer, only to be refused
admittance, and when Charles met his old acquaintance he passed by him
without word or look.[129]
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