What Gunpowder Plot Was

8

I.e., the second Earl.

9

? this.

10

Athenæ, iii. 902.

11

Edin. Review, January 1897, p. 192.

12

This is a mistake. The fine of 3,000l. was imposed for his part in the Essex rebellion. (See Jardine, p. 31.)

13

Off and on, a fortnight at the end of January and beginning of February, and then again probably for a very short time in March.

14

Fawkes was absent part of the time.

15

Mrs. Everett Green in her ‘Calendar of Domestic State Papers,’ adds a sixth (Gunpowder Plot Book, No. 50); but this is manifestly the deposition of November 17. It must be remembered that, when she produced this volume, Mrs. Everett Green was quite new to the work. She was deceived by an indorsement in the handwriting of the eighteenth century, assigning the document to the 8th.

16

The words between brackets are inserted in another hand.

17

It was not actually hired till about Lady Day, 1605.

18

Inserted in the same hand as that in which the words about the cellar were written. It will be observed that the insertion cannot serve any one’s purpose.

19

Gracechurch Street.

20

A mistake for Monday if midnight is to be reckoned with the day preceding it.

21

The remainder of the draft is occupied with the discovery of the plot.

22

Proclamation Book, R.O., p. 114.

23

Bancroft to Salisbury, Nov. 5. Popham to Salisbury, Nov. 5 —G. P. B. Nos. 7, 9.

24

Points and names of persons. —S. P. Dom. xvi. 9, 10.

25

Popham to Salisbury, November 5. (G. P. B. No. 10.) The P.S. only is of the 6th.

26

Narrative, G. P. B. No. 129.

27

In a letter of advice sent to the Nuncio at Paris, on Sept. 10/20, he is distinctly spoken of as a Catholic, as well as Worcester. —Roman Transcripts, R.O.

28

On July 20/30, 1605, Father Creswell writes to Paul V. that Nottingham showed him every civility ‘that could be expected from one who does not profess our holy religion.’

29

The ‘cellar’ was not really hired till a little before Easter, March 31.

30

Second examination of Fawkes, November 6. —G. P. B. No. 16 A.

31

Examination of Gibbons, November 5. —S. P. Dom. xvi. 14.

32

“Mrs. Whynniard, however, tells us,” writes Father Gerard (p. 73), “that the cellar was not to let, and that Bright had not the disposal of the lease, but one Skinner.” What Mrs. Whynniard said was that the vault was ‘let to Mr. Skinner of King Street; but that she and her husband were ready to consent if Mrs. Skinner’s good will could be had.’ ‘Mr.’ in the first writing of the name is evidently a slip of the clerk’s, as Mrs. Whynniard goes on to speak of ‘Mrs. Skinner then, and now the wife of Andrew Bright.’ —G. P. B. No. 39.

33

Probably ‘Hippesley.’

34

Father Gerard, (p. 91, note 5) accepts Goodman’s assertion that it was said that Whynniard ‘as soon as ever he heard of the news what Percy intended, he instantly fell into a fright and died: so that it could not be certainly known who procured him the house, or by whose means.’ That Whynniard was alive on the 7th is proved by the fact that Susan Whynniard is styled his wife and not his widow at the head of this examination. As he was himself not questioned it may be inferred that he was seriously ill at the time. That his illness was caused by fright is probably pure gossip. Mrs. Bright, when examined (G. P. B. No. 24) speaks of Mrs. Whynniard as agreeing to change the tenancy of the cellar, which looks as if the husband had been ill and inaccessible at least six months before his death.

35

Properly ‘John.’

36

S. P. Dom. xvi. 20.

37

G. P. B. No. 37. Witnessed by Northampton and Popham only.

38

The letter to Cornwallis, printed in Winwood’s Memorials, ii. 170, is dated Nov. 9, as it is in Cott. MSS. Vesp. cix. fol. 240, from which it is printed. That volume, however, is merely a letter book. The letter to Edmondes, on the other hand, in the Stowe MSS. 168, fol. 213, is the original, with Salisbury’s autograph signature, and its date has clearly been altered from 7 to 9.

39

Waad to Salisbury, Nov. 7. – Hatfield MSS.

40

Waad to Salisbury, Nov. 8. —G. P. B. No. 48 B.

41

In ‘The King’s Book’ it is stated that Fawkes was shown the rack, but never racked. Probably the torture used on the 9th was that of the manacles, or hanging up by the wrists or thumbs.

42

The principal ones were either killed or taken at Holbeche on that very day.

43

Thomas Winter.

44

Catesby, Percy, and John Wright.

45

I.e. Catesby. In a copy forwarded to Edmondes by Salisbury (Stowe MSS. 168, fol. 223) the copyist had originally written ‘three or four more,’ which is altered to ‘three.’

46

‘Then,’ omitted in the Stowe copy.

47

Christopher Wright.

48

‘Unto,’ in the Stowe copy.

49

Robert Winter. The question whether Keyes worked at this time will be discussed later on.

50

‘Any man,’ in the Stowe copy.

51

‘Others,’ in the Stowe copy.

52

‘One’ is inserted above the line.

53

This is an obvious mistake, as the widow Skinner was not at this time married to Bright, but one just as likely to be made by Fawkes himself as by his examiners.

54

‘Viewed it,’ in the Stowe copy.

55

‘Taken,’ in Stowe copy.

56

‘Thence,’ in Stowe copy.

57

Percy.

58

The words in italics are marked by penstrokes across them for omission.

59

‘With that practice, that,’ in the Stowe copy.

60

‘Then,’ omitted in the Stowe copy.

61

‘But,’ omitted in the Stowe copy.

62

‘Whereof,’ in the Stowe copy.

63

Gerard, p. 268.

64

Stowe MSS., 168, fol. 223.

65

Gerard, p. 170.

66

Gerard, p. 169.

67

S. P. Dom. xii. 24.

68

Gerard, p. 175. Coke’s questions are in S. P. Dom. xvi. 38.

69

The handwriting is quite different.

70

This declaration, therefore, was not, as Mrs. Everett Green says, ‘made to Salisbury.’

71

If anyone chooses to argue that this examination was drawn up regardless of its truth, and only signed by Fawkes after torture had made him incapable of distinguishing truth from falsehood, he may be answered that, in that case, those who prepared it would never have added to the allegation that some of the conspirators had received the Sacrament from Gerard the Jesuit to bind them to secrecy, the passage: – “But he saith that Gerard was not acquainted with their purpose.” This passage is marked for omission by Coke, and it assuredly would not have been found in the document unless it had really proceeded from Fawkes.

72

About whom more hereafter.

73

Gerard afterwards denied that this was true, and the late Father Morris (Life of Gerard, p. 437) argues, with a good deal of probability, that Fawkes mistook another priest for Gerard. For my purpose it is not a matter of any importance.

74

This should be John.

75

Probably, as Father Gerard suggests, what would now be known as a coursing match.

76

Proclamation Book, R.O. p. 117.

77

A late postscript added to the letter to the Ambassadors sent off on the 9th (Winwood, ii. 173) shows that before the end of the day Salisbury had learnt even more of the details than were comprised in the Sheriff’s letter.

78

Nov. 5.

79

Nov. 6.

80

Nov. 7.

81

Nov. 8.

82

The question whether Winter or Keyes was one of two workers will be subsequently discussed.

83

Mrs. Everett Green suggests Nov. 8 (G. P. B. No. 133), but this is merely a deduction from her mistaken date of the examination of the 17th (see p. 17, note 1). In Fawkes’s confession of the 9th Keyes’s Christian name appears to have been subsequently added.

84

Extracts from the Council Registers, Add. MSS. 11,402, fol. 108. The volume of the Council Book itself which recorded the transactions of these years has been lost.

85

G. P. B. No. 101. There is a facsimile in National MSS. Part iv. No. 8.

86

See pp. 18, 20.

87

Gerard, p. 174.

88

Gerard, p. 268.

89

The erasure of Winter’s name, and the substitution of that of Keyes, will be dealt with later.

90

Gerard, p. 168.

91

Father Gerard appears to show his dislike of Salisbury by denying him his title.