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
Bedloe was a man of evil character. He had been in the service of Lord
Bellasis, and had subsequently held a commission as lieutenant in a
foot company in Flanders.[201] He was of a type not uncommon in the
seventeenth century, one of the vast crowd who lived a roving life of
poverty and dishonesty, travelling from one country to another, in
many services and under many names, living upon their own wits and
other people’s money, men for whom no falsehood was too black, no crime
too gross to be turned to profit, men without truth, without shame,
without fear of God or man. Bedloe was afterwards known to be notorious
throughout Europe. He had been imprisoned in Spain for obtaining money
under false pretences. He had been imprisoned in the Marshalsea for
debt. He had been sentenced to death for robbery in Normandy, but had
escaped from prison. When the agitation of the Popish Plot broke out
he had only lately been released from Newgate. He had passed himself
off on the continent as a nobleman, and had swindled his way from
Dunkirk to Madrid. In Flanders his name was Lord Newport, in France
he called himself Lord Cornwallis, in Spain Lord Gerard.[202] When he
was examined before the House of Lords he denied without reservation
that he knew Titus Oates.[203] The government made inquiries behind
his back. His mother, his sister, and a friend were examined by the
Bishop of Llandaff on Bedloe’s behaviour between November 2 and 5, when
he had stayed at his mother’s house at Chepstow. It appeared that he
had discoursed to them about the plot, and had announced his intention
of discovering the murderers of Godfrey; but he also told them that
he had known Oates intimately when they were together in Spain.[204]
This might have led to unfortunate consequences. Bedloe attempted to
recover the slip by saying that he had known Oates personally, but
not by that name, since at Valladolid he had called himself Ambrose.
Oates supported him by the statement that he had been acquainted with
Bedloe in Spain under the name of Williams.[205] The recovery was not
sufficient, for Bedloe had told his family that he had known Oates
by the same name; but the unsystematic method of examination came to
the informer’s aid, and the fact passed at the time unnoticed. His
denial of Oates’ name and recognition of his person took place before
the House of Lords, while the facts which proved his perjury in this
only came to the notice of the privy council. When examinations of
the same persons on the same or different points might be conducted
by the secretaries of state, by the privy council, at the bar of the
House of Lords, at the bar of the House of Commons, or before the
secret committee of either one house or the other, and when it was the
business of nobody to dissect and digest the results of this mass of
raw evidence, it can hardly be a matter of surprise that contradictions
went undetected and lying statements unrebuked.
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