same, as it is proved that I did, what treason is there in this? If I should go to my Lord Cecil, (as I have often done,) and should find a searcher with him with a packet of libels, and my Lord should let me have one or two to peruse, this, I hope, would be no treason in my Lord Cecil.

Lord H. Howard. I remember well that I being sent to take the Lord Cobham's Confession, I pressed him about this book; he suddenly brake out into a great passion, and said, ' A man is unhappy that must accuse his friends; I had the book of Sir Walter Raleigh, but he made no account of it, though he said it was against the King's title.' Now, Sir W. Raleigh, you being questioned what it concerned, said it concerned only the justifying of the late Queen's criminal proceedings against the late Queen of Scots, and nothing against the King's title; and you never gave it my Lord Cobham, but as it lay upon your table, my Lord Cobham might take it. Hereupon my Lord Cobham being afterwards examined, retracted what before he had said, and now said that it contained nothing against the King's title, and that he had it not from Sir W. Raleigh, but took it off from his table when he was sleeping.

Attorney-General. This shows that there was intelligence between Raleigh and Lord Cobham in the Tower; for after Cobham had said the book was against the King's title, he denied it again, and also retracted what he had said, that Raleigh had delivered it to him.

Sir W. Wade. In the first place, my Lord Cobham confessed it, and after he had subscribed his Examination, he revoked it again; to me he always said that the drift of the book was against the King's title.

Attorney-General. The force of this evidence stands upon the time when it was delivered to my Lord Cobham. It appears plainly, by the Lord Cobham himself, that it was after his return from the King, when Sir W. Raleigh could not but know of his discontentment. Now we shall prove the intelligence between the Lord Cobham and Raleigh in the Tower.

Then was read part of an Examination of Lord Cobham, taken 13th October, 1603, as follows:

'It is true that Kemys came to me in the Tower

with a letter from Raleigh, the effect whereof was that he had been before the Council, and was asked divers questions of me, but had cleared me in all. And Kemys told me further, that the Lord Henry Howard had made an argument or syllogism against me, "because of my discontentment I was apt to fall into action." His Lordship saith further, that Kemys did wish him not to be dismayed, for that he brought him word from Sir Walter Raleigh that one witness could not hurt him, or to that effect.'

Then was read an Examination of Kemys,* Sir Walter Raleigh's servant, as follows:

'He saith that he delivered a letter from Sir W. Raleigh to the Lord Cobham in the Tower; and that, by Sir W. Raleigh's orders, he did report to Lord Cobham that my Lord Henry Howard had made a syllogism against him, namely, Because he was discontented, therefore he was likely to enter into an action of treason that Sir W. Raleigh also ordered him to tell the Lord Cobham not to be dismayed, for that one witness could not condemn him.'

Sir Walter Raleigh. I deny the writing of any such letter. My Lord Cecil knows about the time such a letter is supposed to have been written, that I acquainted him with all that I knew. He told me he was glad no more persons were in that treason.

Lord Cecil. This was meant of the Priests' treason. Sir Walter Raleigh. And I told my Lord Cecil I hoped also that my Lord Cobham stood clear, to which my Lord Cecil replied, 'he did hope so, and thought no less.' But for answer, I say there is no such letter or copy thereof showed which you now speak of; the truth is, that at the time when such a letter should be written by me as you suppose, I had of the Lord Cobham 4000 worth of his jewels in my hand; he sent to me about them, and thereupon I wrote to him. For that you tell me of Kemys, I never sent him on any

* Kemys was an old soldier and retainer of Raleigh's, and accompanied him, in 1616, on his unfortunate expedition to Guiana, where, overcome with grief at the failure of a detachment committed to his charge, and the consequent reproaches of his master, he put an end to his existence with his own hand.

such message. I know not what you might draw from myself for fear of torture, for this poor man hath been a close prisoner these eighteen weeks, and hath been threatened with the rack to make him confess; but I dare stand upon it he will not say it now.

Lord Henry Howard. No circumstance moveth me more than this; Kemys was never on the rack, for the King gave charge that no rigour should be used.

Commissioners. We protest before God there was no such matter intended to our knowledge.

Sir Walter Raleigh. Was not the keeper of the rack sent for, and he threatened with it?

Sir W. Wade. When Mr Solicitor and myself examined Kemys, we told him he deserved the rack, but did not threaten him with it.

Commissioners. That was more than we knew.

Lord Cecil. By the speeches let fall here this day, some may take it as if the Lady Arabella and Count Aremberg were nearly touched in this matter, because they are often named, but for the Lady Arabella, lest any should scandalize so innocent a lady, I dare boldly say she was never privy to any of those things. A letter was once written to her, but she no way entertained it, but laughed at it, and presently acquainted the King therewith. And for Count Aremberg, it is not to be noted what others said to him, or presumed of him, but how far he consented or approved.

The Lord-Admiral (Nottingham), being in Court with the Lady Arabella, said, 'The Lady doth here protest, upon her salvation, that she never dealt in any of these things; and so she willed me to tell the Court.'

Sir Walter Raleigh. I have already often urged the producing of my Lord Cobham, but it is still denied me. I appeal now once more to your Lordships in this: my Lord Cobham is the only one that hath accused me, for all the treasons urged upon me are by reflection from him. It is now clear that he hath since retracted; therefore since his accusation is recalled by himself, let him now by word of mouth convict or condemn me. Campion,the Jesuit, was not denied to have his accusers face to face. And if that be true which hath been so laboured all this day, that I have been the setter-on of my Lord

Cobham, his instigator, and have infused these treasons into him, as hath been said, then have I been the efficient cause of his destruction; all his honours, houses, lands, and goods, and all he hath, are lost by me; against whom, then, should he seek revenge but upon me? and the world knoweth him as revengeful of nature as any man living. Besides, a dying man is ever presumed to speak truth: now Cobham is absolutely in the King's mercy; to excuse me cannot avail him; by accusing me he may hope for favour. It is you, then, Mr Attorney, that should press his testimony, and I ought to fear his producing, if all that be true which you have alleged.

Lord Henry Howard. Sir Walter, you have heard that it cannot be granted; pray importune is no longer. Sir Walter Raleigh. Nay, my Lord, it toucheth my life, which I value at as high a rate as your Lordship does yours.

Lord Cecil. I am afraid my often speaking may give opinion to the hearers that I have delight to hear myself talk. Sir Walter Raleigh hath often urged, and still doth urge, the producing of my Lord Cobham; I would know of my Lords the Judges, if it might not stand with the order of our proceedings to take a further time, and know his Majesty's pleasure in that which is desired. The Judges resolved that the Proceedings must go on and receive an end.

Lord Cecil. Sir W. Raleigh, if my Lord Cobham will now affirm that you were acquainted with his dealings with Count Aremberg, that you knew of the letter he received, that you were the chief instigator of him, will you then be concluded by it?

Sir W. Raleigh. Let my Lord Cobham speak before God and the King, and deny God and the King if he speak not truly, and will then say that ever I knew of Arabella's matter, or the money out of Spain, or the surprising Treason, I will put myself upon it. God's will and the King's be done with me!

Lord Cecil. Then, Sir Walter, call upon God to help you, for I do verily believe my Lords will prove this.*

*It is probable that Cecil here refers to the letter from Cobham to the Lords of the Council, afterwards produced by the Attorney-General.

Lord Henry Howard. But what if my Lord Cobham affirm anything equivalent to this, what then? Sir W. Raleigh. My Lord, I put myself upon it. Attorney-General. I shall now produce a witness vira

voce.

He then produced one Dyer, a pilot, who being sworn, said, Being at Lisbon, there caine to me a Portugal gentleman who asked me how the King of England did, and whether he was crowned? I answered him that I hoped our noble King was well and crowned by this, but the time was not come when I came from the coast for Spain. Nay,' said he, 'your King shall never be crowned, for Don Cobham and Don Raleigh will cut his throat before he come to be crowned.' And this in time was found to be spoken in mid July.

Sir W. Raleigh. This is the saying of some wild Jesuit or beggarly Priest; but what proof is it against me?

Attorney-General. It must per force arise out of some preceding intelligence, and shows that your treason had wings.

Sir W. Raleigh. If Cobham did practise with Aremberg, how could it but be known in Spain? Why did they name the Duke of Buckingham in Jack Straw's Rebellion, and the Duke of York in Jack Cade's, but to give countenance to the treasons?

Then was read Lord Cobham's Letter* to Mellows, from the Tower, as follows:

* This correspondence is taken from the State-Paper Office. It is not stated in any of the reports that this transaction, which from the beginning to the end of it does not refer to Raleigh, was proved on his trial. It is, however, fully opened in the speech of Sir Edward Coke, and the original documents are marked, in his hand-writing, with the usual directions to the Officer of the Court how to read them. This may no doubt have been done by him in preparing the proofs for Cobham's trial, and therefore it must remain uncertain whether it was actually proved against Sir Walter Raleigh. We have thought it right to place it here, both as explaining the story, which is somewhat obscure upon the statement of the Attorney-General, and as throwing additional light upon the character of Lord Cobham. It will be observed that the only mode in which Coke seeks to affect Raleigh with this contrivance, is by the argument that it was beyond the reach of Cobham's understand