Produced by Robert Cicconetti, Adam Styles and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries) TRANSCRIBER'S NOTES: Text in italics is enclosed by underscore characters. Where small capitals were used, text has been presented in uppercase. Abbreviations use superscript; the caret, ^, is used before superscript characters. Where multiple superscript characters are used they are enclosed in curly braces, {}. A small number of macron diacritical marks are used in the text and appear as an overlined letter. These marks are indicated by [=a] where a is the overlined character. This text makes extensive use of archaic spellings in quoted material which has not been amended or modernized. Where typographic errors have been repaired, they are detailed in further transcribers' notes at the end of the text. [Illustration: THE POWDER PLOT] WHAT WAS THE GUNPOWDER PLOT? THE TRADITIONAL STORY TESTED BY ORIGINAL EVIDENCE BY JOHN GERARD, S.J. [Illustration] LONDON OSGOOD, McILVAINE & CO. 45, ALBEMARLE STREET, W. 1897 PREFACE. THE following study of the Gunpowder Plot has grown out of the accidental circumstance that, having undertaken to read a paper before the Historical Research Society, at Archbishop's House, Westminster, as the day on which it was to be read chanced to be the 5th of November,[1] I was asked to take the famous conspiracy for my subject. It was with much reluctance that I agreed to do so, believing, as I then did, that there was absolutely nothing fresh to say upon this topic, that no incident in our annals had been more thoroughly threshed out, and that in regard of none, so far, at least, as its broader outlines are concerned, was the truth more clearly established.