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
evidence offered in the investigation of the Plot. He expressed himself
doubtful as to the guilt of Berry and thought that Prance might have
made a mistake of identity. It was immediately said that Berry had made
horrible confessions to him, and that he had been pressed at court not
to divulge them.[252]
Prison life in the seventeenth century was hard. Prisoners were treated
in a way that would now be considered shameful, and Prance did not
escape his share of ill-treatment. He was kept in the cell reserved
for felons and murderers. According to the general practice he was
heavily ironed. Until his life was thought in danger he had nothing
but the boards on which to lie. The greatest hardship arose from the
cold, against which there was no real provision. But there is no
evidence that Prance more hardly used than his fellow gaol-birds.
A detestable attempt was afterwards made to prove that he had been
tortured in prison to extract confessions from him. In the course of
the year 1680 Mrs. Cellier, the Roman Catholic midwife of otherwise
dubious reputation, published a pamphlet entitled “Malice Defeated;
or a Brief Relation of the Accusation and Deliverance of Elizabeth
Cellier.” The work was an attack upon the prosecutors of the Popish
Plot, conducted with all the coarse weapons of seventeenth-century
controversy. Incidentally she called the crown witnesses “hangman’s
hounds for weekly pensions.” On September 11 she was indicted for a
malicious libel and tried before Baron Weston and the Lord Mayor. The
libel lay in her open declaration that Prance was put on the rack in
Newgate and that Francis Corral, who had been imprisoned on suspicion
of complicity in Godfrey’s murder, was subjected to intolerably ill
treatment and active torture in Newgate in order to make him confess
his guilt.[253] The charges which Mrs. Cellier made were not only
outrageous but ridiculous, and were so improbable as not to deserve
detailed discussion. Witnesses were called for the prosecution who
proved their complete falsity, and Mrs. Cellier’s counsel virtually
threw up his brief. Not only did the keeper of Newgate deny everything
in the publication relating to himself, but the parties who had been
mentioned in it were summoned as witnesses and gave decisive evidence.
Prance denied the whole story and, what was of greater value than his
word, made the pertinent remark that, had he been used in such a way
as Mrs. Cellier suggested, Dr. Lloyd must certainly have known about
it. The man Corral had been kept out of court by the defence, but he
had already denied all Mrs. Cellier’s allegations in a deposition
made before the Lord Mayor. His wife had made a similar deposition
and, being now called as a witness, wholly refused to support the
statements of the accused. Her husband had been treated hardly, as were
all prisoners, but Mrs. Cellier’s charges of torture and brutality
were false. She had been allowed to see her husband occasionally and
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