and packing them in a trunk which stood beside it, desired Sydney to affix his seal. This he declined doing, as he was ignorant what had been put in. The messenger then affixed his own seal, promising that the packages should not be opened except in Sydney's presence. He could never afterwards however obtain possession of them. When brought before the privy council, he prudently declined answering most of the questions that were put to him, well knowing what advantage would be taken of any unguarded admissions. Although nothing appeared against him to justify his detention, he was most illegally committed to the tower, where his confinement was extremely rigorous. His money and bills in the hands of his banker, and all his other property, even to his wearing apparel, were seized. His friends, and even his servants, were denied access to him for the purpose of carrying him a change of linen. It was not till after repeated applications to the king and council, that Ducasse, a Frenchman in his confidence, was permitted to attend him. Lord Russell was already in custody. Howard, who was still at large, was continually protesting his disbelief of a plot and his ignorance of the alleged conspiracy. He applied to Sydney's servants to be intrusted with their master's plate, declaring his conviction of his innocence, and expressing his own great obligations to him in his imprisonment. He evinced nevertheless the greatest consternation, and was advised by his friends to keep out of the way. On the eighth of July, however, he was taken in his own house while endeavoring to conceal himself in a chimney. Hambden and Essex were soon afterwards committed to the tower, lord Grey of Wark, who was one of the association, having effected his escape, and the duke of Monmouth still evading his pursuers.

On the 20th of July three persons, convicted of a treasonable design to assassinate the king, suffered death, protesting, however, their entire ignorance of the crime for which they died. Lord Essex was found in his apartment in the tower with his throat cut. As he was supposed to have died by his own hands, this circumstance was made use of to produce an unfavorable influence on the minds of the jury against lord Russell, whose trial was hurried on that it might lose none of its effect. The principal evidence against him was lord Howard, who owed his own life to the sacrifice of his associates. Lord Russell was convicted of treason, and executed on the

twenty-first of July, discovering the greatest firmness during his trial, and the most dignified composure in the hour of death.

In the mean time the court was making the most strenuous exertions to procure evidence against Sydney. The lord Howard was ready to swear to the same facts against Sydney, which he had stated on the trial of lord Russell, but as the statute 25 Edward III, on which alone Sydney could be indicted, required two witnesses to an overt act of treason, it became necessary to procure a second. For this purpose the prisons were ransacked in vain, nor was the court more successful in an attempt to derive matter of accusation from himself. When a committee of the privy council were sent to examine him in the tower, he treated them roughly, observing, that they seemed to want evidence, and were come to draw it from his own mouth, but they should have nothing from him.' But the crown lawyers having gotten their prey within their fangs, were not to be disappointed. They accordingly resorted to other means to make up for this defect of testimony, and to counteract the talents and intrepidity of Sydney.

The chief justice of the king's bench being lately dead, sir George Jefferies, a king's sergeant, who had distinguished himself by his violence at lord Russell's trial, was promoted to the vacant seat, (Sept. 29, 1683,) and joined with three colleagues of similar principles and views. As a warning to all other judges, sir Francis Pemberton, who had conducted himself with some regard to decency at lord Russell's trial, was removed from his seat at the privy council, and his office as chief justice of the common pleas. It is known that Jefferies even consulted with the crown lawyers on the means of compassing the prisoner's death. At the same time two individuals entirely devoted to the service of the crown were appointed sheriffs of London and Middlesex, by a commission under the great seal, who selected for under sheriffs two others of the same character. These preliminary steps being taken, Sydney was informed by the lieutenant of the tower on the 6th of November, that he had received orders to bring him before the court of king's bench, by a writ of habeas corpus on the following day. He was conveyed to Westminster early in the morning, before the grand jury were assembled, or any bill of indictment had been exhibited against him, and

detained about an hour at a tavern, till the bill was found. On its being presented, he was hurried to the bar through a guard of soldiers and immediately arraigned. The indictment was long, confused, and perplexed, setting forth no overt act of treason precisely, nor any person with whom he had conspired. To this bill he excepted as vicious and erroneous, and desired to see the record, which was peremptorily denied by the chief justice, who insisted that he must either plead to the indictment or demur, which amounted to a confession of the fact. He then offered a special plea, quoting the three acts of treason, and desiring that the separate charges might be distinguished; which was also refused, unless waving the fact he would rest the case solely on that plea. Sydney then attempted to make some remarks in his own vindication, when he was interrupted by the chief justice, who declared, that unless he pleaded in the usual form, sentence should be instantly pronounced. He was thus obliged to abandon every advantage which the law allowed him, and by pleading not guilty to come to a general issue on the merits of his cause. A fortnight was allowed him to prepare for his trial; but a copy of the indictment, and the assistance of counsel, unless he should assign any particular point of law which the court might think proper to debate, were refused. The indictment was then read to him in Latin, but all information respecting the statute on which the attorney-general intended to proceed against him was refused.

When the day of trial approached, Sydney petitioned the king for a copy of the record of lord Russell's attainder, and of the indictment against himself, as necessary to his just defence; but his petition appears to have been disregarded. When Sydney was furnished with a pannel from which the jury was to be drawn, he found that it consisted chiefly of men of ruined character or fortunes, with or without freeholds, and chosen expressly by the solicitors of the crown. When Sydney appeared before the court, on the 21st of November, a copy of the indictment was again peremptorily refused to him, although he produced a transcript of the statute by which it is expressly allowed in all cases, and to all men. The jury being called, he excepted against several persons as being in the king's service, wanting freeholds, or having exposed themselves to infamy by some specific misconduct. But every special objection being overruled, he was forced to challenge perempNew Series, No. 9.

11

torily those whom he knew to have been chosen for his destruction, and thereby when his challenges were exhausted to admit of others of the same cast. After a speech from sir Robert Sawyer, the attorney-general, detailing the heads of the accusation, West, who having confessed many treasons was still unpardoned, Rumsey and Keiling were examined as to the design of a general insurrection, and although totally unconnected with the prisoner, were allowed to depose against him whatever they had heard from others. The king's counsel had not the effrontery to pretend that this was competent evidence, but it was artfully introduced to influence the minds. of the jury, and to prepare them for the testimony of lord Howard. His evidence did not materially vary from what he had deposed at the trial of lord Russell. He gave a detail of two conversations which had passed between that nobleman, the duke of Monmouth, lord Essex, Young Hampden, the prisoner and himself, on the most effectual means of defending the public interest from invasion, without involving themselves in the obloquy of entertaining any selfish designs. Nothing, however, of moment appeared to be agreed upon at these meetings, excepting the necessity of settling an understanding with the earl of Argyle, and also of communicating with sir John Cochrane and some other leading whigs in Scotland, when Sydney recommended Aaron Smith as a person whom they might safely trust, and afterwards provided him with money for his journey. Of this last circumstance, however, the witness only spoke from hearsay. The crown lawyers being obliged to rest their case on the unsupported assertions of lord Howard, who had testified nothing of a treasonable nature, ventured to supply the defect of a second witness, by producing some papers found in Sydney's study, and supposed to be in his handwriting, in which the paramount authority of the people, and the lawfulness of resisting an oppressive government, were ably and eloquently maintained. A few passages best suited to their purpose being read at the request of the attorney-general, Sydney complained of this partial proceeding; when the chief justice, intending to entrap him, slily asked to what heads he would refer. Perceiving the drift, however, he calmly answered, let him give an account of it that did it.' He afterwards requested, that as parts of the writing had been quoted the whole might be read, but this was refused. The earl of Anglesey, lord

Clare, lord Paget, bishop Burnet, and two gentlemen of the Howard family, were called on the part of the prisoner to impeach the credibility of lord Howard, who all deposed either to his solemn asseverations of the prisoner's innocence, or to his repeated disavowal of all knowledge or belief of the supposed plot. Blake, a draper, testified to his lordship's saying, that he must not have his pardon till the drudgery of swearing was over.' Ducasse and two female servants gave evidence to his denying all communication with their master on this subject, and applying to them for the custody of his plate and goods. Lord Howard admitted a debt to Sydney with which he had been charged; and some other witnesses did not appear. Sydney, though unassisted by counsel, defended himself with great calmness and ability, in which he was aided by notes handed him by several gentlemen of the bar, who, though not allowed to speak in his behalf, had the spirit and courage to stand by him.

He commented with great ingenuity on the evidence, exposed the incredibility and inadequacy of lord Howard's testimony, and the absurdity and illegality of introducing papers containing theoretical remarks on politics, written for aught appeared twenty years before, as evidence of a conspiracy against the life of the king. The court, aware of his hasty temper, endeavored by frequent interruptions, to provoke and embarrass him. Sydney, however, bore it all with an admirable coolness, never suffering himself to be driven from his point. Finch, the solicitor-general, closed the prosecution, when Sydney attempted to add a few words, but was interrupted by Jefferies, who, in his charge to the jury, sanctioned all the principles of law advanced by the king's counsel, and artfully endeavored to blend the consultations in which Sydney had been implicated, with the other supposed conspiracies for an insurrection, and attempt upon the life of the king. The charge of Withens, one of the judges, is so extraordinary, that we shall give it at large from the state trials. Gentlemen, it is fit you should have our opinion; in all points of law we agree with the lord chief justice. Says colonel Sydney, Here's a mighty conspiracy, but nothing comes of it. Who must we thank for that? None but the Almighty Providence. One of themselves was troubled in conscience and comes and discovers it. If Keiling had not discovered it, God knows whether we might have been alive at this day.' Jefferies fol