+Source.+--Evelyn's _Diary_. Vol. ii., pp. 158-163. Bohn edition.
_November 30._ The signal day begun the trial (at which I was present)
of my Lord Vicount Stafford, for conspiring the death of the King;
second son to my Lord Thomas Howard Earl of Arundel and Surrey, Earl
Marshall of England, and grandfather to the present Duke of Norfolk,
whom I so well knew, and from which excellent person I received
so many favours. It was likewise his birthday. The trial was in
Westminster-Hall, before the King, Lords, and Commons; just in the same
manner as, forty years past, the great and wise Earl of Strafford (there
being but one letter differing their names) received his trial for
pretended ill government in Ireland, in the very same place, this Lord
Stafford's father being then High-Steward. The place of sitting was now
exalted some considerable height from the paved floor of the Hall, with
a stage of boards. The throne, woolpacks for the Judges, long forms for
the Peers, chair for the Lord Steward, exactly ranged, as in the House
of Lords. The sides on both hands scaffolded to the very roof for the
members of the House of Commons. At the upper end, and on the right side
of the King's state, was a box for his Majesty, and on the left, others
for the great ladies, and over head a gallery for ambassadors and public
ministers. At the lower end, or entrance, was a bar, and place for the
prisoner, the Lieutenant of the Tower of London, the axe-bearer and
guards, my Lord Stafford's two daughters, the Marchioness of Winchester
being one; there was likewise a box for my Lord to retire into. At the
right hand, in another box, somewhat higher, stood the witnesses; at the
left, the managers, in the name of the Commons of England, namely,
Serjeant Maynard (the great lawyer, the same who prosecuted the cause
against the Earl of Strafford forty years before, being now near eighty
years of age), Sir William Jones, late Attorney-General, Sir Francis
Winnington, a famous pleader, and Mr. Treby, now Recorder of London, not
appearing in their gowns as lawyers, but in their cloaks and swords, as
representing the Commons of England: to these were joined Mr. Hampden,
Dr. Sacheverell, Mr. Poule, Colonel Titus, Sir Thomas Lee, all gentlemen
of quality, and noted parliamentary men. The two first days, in which
were read the commission and impeachment, were but a tedious entrance
into matter of fact, at which I was but little present. But, on
Thursday, I was commodiously seated amongst the Commons, when the
witnesses were sworn and examined. The principal witnesses were Mr.
Oates (who called himself Dr.), Mr. Dugdale, and Turberville. Oates
swore that he delivered a commission to Viscount Stafford from the Pope,
to be Paymaster-General to an army intended to be raised;--Dugdale
[swore] that being at Lord Aston's, the prisoner dealt with him plainly
to murder his Majesty; and Turberville, that at Paris he also proposed
the same to him.
_3rd December._ The depositions of my Lord's witnesses were taken, to
invalidate the King's witnesses; they were very slight persons, but,
being fifteen or sixteen, they took up all that day, and in truth they
rather did my Lord injury than service.
_4th._ Came other witnesses of the Commons to corroborate the King's,
some being Peers, some Commons, with others of good quality, who took
off all the former day's objections, and set the King's witnesses _recti
in Curiâ_.
_6th._ Sir William Jones summoned up the evidence; to him succeeded all
the rest of the managers, and then Mr. Henry Poule made a vehement
oration. After this my Lord, as on all occasions, and often during the
trial, spoke in his own defence, denying the charge altogether, and that
he had never seen Oates, or Turberville, at the time and manner
affirmed; in truth, their testimony did little weigh with me; Dugdale's
only seemed to press hardest, to which my Lord spake a great while, but
confusedly, without any method.
One thing my Lord said as to Oates, which I confess did exceedingly
affect me: That a person who during his depositions should so vauntingly
brag that though he went over to the church of Rome, yet he was never a
Papist, nor of their religion, all the time that he seemed to apostatise
from the Protestant, but only as a spy; though he confessed he took
their sacrament, worshipped images, went through all their oaths, and
discipline of their proselites, swearing secrecy and to be faithful, but
with intent to come over again and betray them;--that such an hypocrite,
that had so deeply prevaricated as even to turn idolator (for so we of
the Church of England termed it), attesting God so solemnly that he was
entirely theirs and devoted to their interest, and consequently (as he
pretended) trusted;--I say, that the witness of such a profligate wretch
should be admitted against the life of a peer,--this my Lord looked upon
as a monstrous thing, and such as must needs redound to the dishonour of
our religion and nation. And verily I am of his Lordship's opinion: such
a man's testimony should not be taken against the life of a dog. But the
merit of something material which he discovered against Coleman, put him
in such esteem with the Parliament, that now, I fancy he stuck at
nothing, and thought everybody was to take what he said for gospel. The
consideration of this, and some other circumstances, began to stagger
me; particularly how it was possible that one who went among the Papists
on such a design, and pretended to be intrusted with so many letters and
commissions from the Pope and the party, nay and delivered them to so
many great persons, should not reserve one of them to show, nor so much
as one copy of any commission, which he who had such dexterity in
opening letters might certainly have done, to the undeniable conviction
of those whom he accused; but, as I said, he gained credit on Coleman.
But, as to others whom he so madly flew upon, I am little inclined to
believe his testimony, he being so slight a person, so passionate, so
ill-bred, and of such impudent behaviour; nor is it likely that such
piercing politicians as the Jesuits should trust him with so high and so
dangerous secrets.
_7th December._ On Tuesday I was again at the trial, when judgment was
demanded; and, after my Lord had spoken what he could in denying the
fact, the managers answering the objections, the Peers adjourned to
their House, and within two hours returned again. There was, in the
meantime, this question put to the judges, "whether there being but one
witness to any single crime, or act, it could amount to convict a man of
treason." They gave an unanimous opinion that in case of treason they
all were overt acts, for though no man should be condemned by one
witness for any one act, yet for several acts to the same intent it was
valid; which was my Lord's case. This being past, and the Peers in their
seats again, the Lord Chancellor Finch (this day the Lord High-Steward)
removing to the woolsack next his Majesty's state, after summoning the
lieutenant of the tower to bring forth his prisoner, and proclamation
made for silence, demanded of every peer (who were in all eighty-six)
whether William, Lord Viscount Stafford, were guilty of the treason laid
to his charge, or not guilty.
Then the Peer spoken to, standing up, and laying his right hand upon his
breast, said Guilty, or Not Guilty, upon my honour, and then sat down,
the Lord Steward noting their suffrages as they answered upon a paper:
when all had done, the number of Not guilty being but 31, the Guilty 55:
and then, after proclamation for silence again, the Lord Steward
directing his speech to the prisoner, against whom the axe was turned
edgeways and not before, in aggravation of his crime, he being ennobled
by the King's father, and since received many favours from his present
Majesty: after enlarging on his offence, deploring first his own
unhappiness that he who had never condemned any man before should now be
necessitated to begin with him, he then pronounced sentence of death by
hanging, drawing, and quartering, according to form, with great
solemnity and dreadful gravity; and after a short pause, told the
prisoner that he believed the Lords would intercede for the omission of
some circumstances of his sentence, beheading only excepted; and then
breaking his white staff, the Court was dissolved. My Lord Stafford
during all this latter part spake but little, and only gave their
Lordships thanks after the sentence was pronounced; and indeed behaved
himself modestly, and as became him.
It was observed that all his own relations of his name and family
condemned him, except his nephew, the Earl of Arundel, son to the Duke
of Norfolk. And it must be acknowledged that the whole trial was carried
on with exceeding gravity: so stately and august appearance I had never
seen before; for besides the innumerable spectators of gentlemen and
foreign ministers, who saw and heard all the proceedings, the prisoner
had the consciences of all the Commons of England for his accusers, and
all the Peers to be his Judges and Jury. He had likewise the assistance
of what counsel he would, to direct him in his plea, who stood by him.
And yet I can hardly think that a person of his age and experience
should engage men whom he never saw before (and one of them that came to
visit him as a stranger at Paris) _point blank_ to murder the King: God
only who searches hearts, can discover the truth. Lord Stafford was not
a man beloved, especially of his own family.
* * * * *
_22nd._ A solemn public Fast that God would prevent all Popish plots,
avert his judgments, and give a blessing to the proceedings of
parliament now assembled, and which struck at the succession of the Duke
of York.
_29th._ The Viscount Stafford was beheaded on Tower-hill.