the house, to the end that having her in your power you might do what you listed?

Southampton. Good Mr Attorney, let me ask you what, in your conscience, you think we would have done to her Majesty if we had gained the Court?

Attorney-General. I protest upon my soul, and in my conscience, I do believe she should not have lived long after she had been in your power. Note but the precedents of former ages: how long lived King Richard the Second after he was surprised in the same manner? The pretence there also was to remove certain Councillors; but it shortly after cost the King his life. Such is the unquenchable thirst of ambition, never satisfied so long as any greatness is unachieved. But I know this for certain, that to surprise the Court or take the Tower by way of defence from private enemies, is plain treason.

Southampton. The taking of the Tower was rejected as ridiculous to be thought on; neither was the surprising of the Court meant but for a quiet access to her Majesty.

Then the Judges being thereto required by the Peers, delivered their several opinions concerning the question before propounded by the Earl of Southampton, and after argued it severally; and they agreed to the following resolutions: —

*

First, they resolved that the Earl of Essex, in going with a troop of persons from Essex-house into the City, and there calling upon the citizens to aid him in defending his life, and forcing himself into the Queen's presence, with power sufficient to remove certain of his enemies in attendance upon the Queen, was guilty of high treason, inasmuch as the action threatened force and restraint to the person of the Queen.

Secondly, they resolved that the Earl's proceedings in the City of London amounted to actual rebellion, though he might intend no corporal harm to the Queen's person.

Thirdly, they resolved that the adherence of the Earl of Southampton to the Earl of Essex in the City, although he might be ignorant of any other purpose

* These Resolutions are taken from Moor's Reports, p. 621.

than to revenge a private quarrel of the Earl of Essex against certain of the Queen's servants, was high treason in him, because the acts of the Earl of Essex amounted to rebellion.

Fourthly, they resolved that all persons going with the Earl of Essex from Essex-house into the City, whether they were privy to his design or not, or whether they departed upon proclamation made or not, were traitors; but that those who joined him suddenly in the City, and dispersed as soon as the Proclamation was made, were within the terms of the Proclamation, and entitled to a pardon.

Attorney-General. Well, my Lord, I pray you what can you devise to say for Sir John Davis, another of your adherents? for he hath confessed that he is a Papist and a Catholic, and drawn into it by Sir Christopher Blunt, one of your chief Counsel; and he called for a seminary priest immediately upon his commitment to absolve him.

Essex. If Sir John Davis be such a man, it cannot but be strange to me to hear it ; for, although I cannot see into the secrets of any man's heart, I have observed that he came dutifully to prayer and the service of God in my house, and conformed himslf very well outwardly; thus much I can witness of him. And as for Blunt, God is my witness, I have been so far from favouring his Popish religion, and have so earnestly dealt with him to reform him, that he hath often told me I have been too passionate. But, Mr Attorney, you say we have committed treason in raising a rebellious power; I pray you let me hear how you can prove it.

Serjeant Yelverton. Why, my Lord, do you deny the raising of the power? Why did my Lord of Southampton and the rest come to your house that day?

Southampton. By your favour, good Mr Serjeant Yelverton, my coming to Essex-house was no strange matter; and when I came thither that same morning, I protest I had not above ten or twelve men attending me, which was but my usual company, and therefore I was far from purposing to raise a tumult.

Attorney-General. Why, the reason of this was, you thought all London would have risen with you. But,

good my Lord, I beseech your Grace that the Examinations of Sir Charles Danvers may now be read.

Then was read the first Confession* of Sir Charles Danvers, taken the 18th day of February, 1600-1:

'He confesseth that, before Christmas, the Earl of Essex had bethought himself how he might secure his access unto the Queen in such sort as he might not be resisted; but no resolution was determinately taken until the coming up of this Examinate a little after Christmas.

'And then he doth confess, that the resolution was taken to possess himself of the Court; which resolution was taken agreeably to certain articles, which the Earl of Essex did send to the Earl of Southampton, this Examinate, Sir Ferdinando Gorge, and Sir John Davis, written with the Earl's own hand. To which consultation, being held at Drury-house, some four or five days before Sunday, that was the 8th of February, Littleton came in towards the end.

"The points which the Earl of Essex projected under his hand, were these:

"First, whether it were fit to take the Tower of London? The reason whereof was this: that after the Court was possessed, it was necessary to give reputation to the action by having such a place to bridle the City, if there should be any mislike of their possessing the Court.

To the possessing of the Court these circumstances were considered:

'First, the Earl of Essex should have assembled all the Noblemen and Gentlemen of quality of his party; out of which number he should have chosen so many as should have possessed all the places of the Court, where there might have been any likelihood of resistance; which being done, the Earl of Essex, with divers noblemen, should have presented himself to the Queen.

'The manner how it should have been executed was in this sort: Sir Christopher Blunt should have charge of the outer gate, as he thinketh: this Examinate, with

From the State-Paper Office.

his company, should have made good the presence, and should have seized upon the halberds of the Guard. Sir John Davis should have taken charge of the hall. All this being set, upon a signal given, the Earl should have come into the court with his company.

·

Being asked what they would have done after? he saith, they would have sent to have satisfied the City, and have called a Parliament, * as he hath heard them talk.

'These were the resolutions set down by the Earl of Essex of his own hand, after divers consultations.' The second Confession of Sir Charles Danvers, taken the same day :

'Some points of the articles which my Lord of Essex sent unto Drury-house, as near as I can remember, were these:-Whether both the Court and the Tower should be attempted at one time? If both, what numbers should be thought requisite for either? If the Court alone, what places should be first possessed? — by what persons? And for those which were not to come into the Court beforehand,-where and in what sort they might assemble themselves, with least suspicion, to come in with my Lord? Whether it were not fit for my Lord, and some of the principal persons, to be armed with privy-coats?'

When this was read, Mr Attorney-General produced the Examination of Sir John Davis, taken the 18th of February, 1630-1, which contained in effect as follows:

'Being demanded, how long before my Lord of Essex's tumult he knew of such his purpose? He answers, that he knew not directly of any meaning my Lord had, until the Sunday seven-night before, or thereabout.

'Being demanded, what he knew then? he answered, that my Lord consulted to possess himself of the Court, at such convenient time when he might find least opposition. For executing which enterprise, and of other affairs, he appointed my Lord of Southampton, Sir Charles Danvers, Sir Ferdinando Gorge, and him

* In the original these words are marked for omission by Bacon, and are accordingly omitted in his Declaration.'

self to meet at Drury-house, and there to consider of the same, and such other projects as his Lordship delivered them: and principally for surprising of the Court, and for the taking of the Tower of London. About which business they had two meetings, which were five or six days before the insurrection.

'He farther saith, that Sir Christopher Blunt was not at this consultation, but that he stayed and advised with my Lord himself about other things to him unknown; for that my Lord trusted several men in several businesses, and not all together.

'Being demanded, what was resolved in the opinion of these four before named? He saith, that Sir Charles Danvers was appointed to the presence-chamber and himself to the hall: and that my Lord was to determine, himself, who should have guarded the courtgate, and the water-gate. And that Sir Charles Danvers, upon signal or watch-word, should have come out of the presence into the guard-chamber; and then some out of the hall to have met him, and so have stept between the Guard and their halberds; of which Guard they hoped to have found but a dozen, or some such small number.

'Being asked, whether he heard that such as my Lord misliked should have received any violence? He saith, that my Lord avowed the contrary; and that my Lord said, he would call them to an honourable trial, and not use the sword.

"Being demanded, whether my Lord thought his enemies to be Spanish, bona fide, or no? He saith, that he never heard any such speech; and if my Lord used any such, it came into his head on the sudden.

'Being demanded, what party my Lord had in London? He saith, that the Sheriff, Smith, was his hope as he thinketh.

'Being demanded, whether my Lord promised liberty of Catholic religion? He saith, that Sir Christopher Blunt did give hope of it.

'Being asked whether he knew Sir Charles Danvers to be a Catholic? He saith, that he knew it not till that Sunday after dinner.'