EVery Rational Creature loves to be, and loves to be happy: This is so rooted in the Nature of Mankind, that whosoever acts, or opines con­trary to this Principle, must needs be wholly deprived of the use of Reason. All the Rhetorick in the world can never perswade a man (knowingly) to make himself miserable. This being so, I say it is impossible, that a dying man, who is compos mentis, and does truly be­lieve, there is a God, who is powerful and just, in rewar­ding good, and punishing Evil, should at the very point of death averr his Innocence, and call God (who is im­mediately to Judge him) to witness the truth, or to pu­nish the falsehood of what he then saye, and yet be guilty of the Fact by him so denyed.

Whoever believes, there is a God, must believe him to be Truth, and Iustice it self; and therefore he must know, there can be no Treason of a higher Nature com­mitted against his Divine Essence, then Sacrilegiously to abuse, and set his Holy Name to a Lye; and also he must be convinced, that, since God is infinitely Just, the punishment he will inflict on such a fact, must bear pro­portion with the Enormity of the crime. Since then it is impossible to humane nature for any man, knowingly and advisedly to make himself miserable, nay infinitely and eternally miserable; therefore most impossible it is, that all those dying men upon the score of the Plott (be­lieving there is a God) should vouch him, as a witness, and Garanty of their innocence, and yet be culpable both of the fact, by them denyed, and of the sacrilegious af­front at the same time offered to His Divine Majesty.

[Page 7]It remains then to consider, whither these dying men did believe, there is a God: If we believe them to be Papists, the question is at an end, since all mankind knows, that the Church of Rome believes there is a God, however it may err in the manner of worshiping him; for if they did not believe there is a God, they could not erre in the manner of worshiping him. So that, if they dyed [...]ists, they believed in God. Now that they dy­ed Papists, I think the matter proves it self, and can not be proved by any thing that is more evident: For all, that we can possibly know of another man's internal belief, is by his profession of it; and at what time can such professi­on be of stronger evidence, then at the hour of his death?

There is another weighty reason to demonstrate a Po­sterior, that those Executed persons did believe in God: For all Atheists (as such) must of necessity love this pre­sent life, as their supreme felicity; for death with them is an end of all being: and therefore for the preservati­on of life (their summum bonum) their is nothing in their power, which they will not do: whence it must follow, that if those men had been Atheists, they would certain­ly have confest a Plott, and would have impeached others, whereby their own lives might have been preserved.

Now then the question in short will be, whether more credit ought to be given to the Oathes of Mr. Oates, Bedlow, Prance and Dugdale, and the rest of that crew, who live, and are in fair hopes to live long, and are no lo­sers by their Swearing, or to the Oath, and imprecati­ons of so many dying men, at the very moment of their deaths; who are so far from gaining by their swearing, that if they would but confess the contrary, to what they [Page 8] swear, might save their lives, and perhaps be no less pre­ferr'd, than Mr. Oats and his fellows; I say again, so far from gaining by such their swearing (if not trew) that ei­ther they must believe, there is no God, or else (as I said before) they are certain to damn their souls eternally, by making a sacrilegious use of his dreadful name with their last breath, solemnly to attest, and confirm a Lye.

This seems to me to be a plain demonstration, whither the matter be considered in order to Christianity, or to hu­mane nature, for neither as Christians, is it possible for them to do an act (the last of their lives) to affront the Almighty, who is immediately to judge them, nor as ra­tional creatures, can they wittingly expose themselves to certain, and continual misery. Therefore most evident it is born according to Reason, and Christianity (and so it must appear to all, who are not void of both) that their last words were true; and that Mr. Fenwick had a great deal of reason to close his Speech in this manner; And I hope Christian charity will not let you think, that by the last act of my life I would cast away my soul by sealing up my last breath with a damnable Lye.

It is a prodigious thing to see with what down-right Nonsence, and contradiction the seduced Rabble are im­pos'd upon in this point by those sticklers, who so eager­ly follow the chase of innocent blood; and still search for the bottome of the Plott, as the Heathens did for good or bad Fortune in the intrels of living Creatures; but with this difference, that they were only for the cutting up of beast, but our Zealots are for the imbowelling of men.

First they tell them, that Papists have Dispensations to [Page 9] say and swear any thing for the advantage of their cause, and yet all the Roman Catholicks in the world, both li­ving and dying, solemnly protest, and declare, that God himself, much less the Pope, cannot give a dispensation for the doing of an evil thing. Hear what dying H [...] says to this point. I do utterly abhorre and detest that abomi­nable and false doctrine laid to our charge, that we can have Licence to commit Perjury, or any sin to advantage our cause, being expresly against the Doctrine of St. Paul, Non sunt fa­cienda mala, ut eveniant bona, Evil is not to be done, that good may come thereof. The rest of them speak upon this matter to the same purpose: Now since inward belief cannot be known, but by outward profession, who are to be believed in this point, the living calumniators, or the dying Professors?

In the next place they take upon them to interpret the words of our dying men; and say, that when they declare themselves innocent, as the child unborn, &c. The meaning is; they are innocent, because they have had the Priests abso­lution for it, although the Fact was committed by them. This piece of subtle Nonsence does mightily please, both the seducing Commentatours and their seduced party. But first it is false, that a man is innocent, because he is absolved: One commits Treason, and hath the King's Pardon, is he therefore innocent? clean contrary; a Par­don is rather an argument of the crime committed, and does no more, but remit the penalty. For no pardon or ab­solution can make that thing not to be done, which is done. Besides no Roman Catholick, according to the doctrine of his Church, can swear, he is innocent in any sence by reason of his absolution; because no man can evidently [Page 10] know (without a particular revelation) that he is recon­ciled to God, or whither in his sight he be worthy of love, or hatred; but all men are still bound to work their salvation with fear, and trembling. Since then no man can swear a thing, which he does not evidently know; how therefore in this suppositious sence of innocence, which supposeth the Fact committed, is it possible, they could swear they were innocent? whence it is manifest, that our executed men did with their last breath deny, in the presence of God, and men, (according to their own words) the very Fact it self, viz. the composing, and con­spiring the death of the King; and did assert their inno­cence, not by vertue of an absolution, but by pleading, non est factum.

There is yet another shift (I think a very unchristian one) made use of by this sort of men to obscure the truth, and evade the force of our argument: They say, that af­ter our dying men had first lustily forsworn themselves in the declaration of their innocence, then for the last Act of this Tragical Farce (as their charity represents it) the Priests laid their heads together, and absolv'd each other, and all was right again; and so away they pack'd for a­nother world. Deus non irridetur. It is hard to say, whi­ther the impiety or the impossibility of this Story be grea­ter: it is such a mockery put upon our merciful, but just God, to abuse, and affront him upon presumption of his Pardon, that I wonder, how the fiction, and invention of it could enter into the thoughts of a Christian. As for the impossibility of it, certain it is, those Jesuits, who were the teachers of others, could not be ignorant of the Do­ctrine of their own Church, set forth in every Catechism, [Page 11] and in their Councel of Trent: viz. That no absolution is available to a sinner, which is not preceded by a sorrow, and detestation of the sin by him committed, and by a firm purpose of transgressing no more: Now, since it is impossible voluntarily to do a thing, and at the same time to detest it; and since without a detestation and abhor­rency of their sin, they could not hope for any benefit from an absolution; how then can those dying men, with any appearency of reason, be thought to make use of this wretched artifice to cheat the world, and manifestly to damn their own souls? more-over they could not be ig­norant, that God Almighty is at no time obliged to give a revolted Sinner the grace of Repentance; much less will he do it, at that very moment, when such sinner shall pervert the mercy of his Redeemer into a motive, and in­centive of Rebellion against him; and so make a Poyson of the Antidote.

All the premisses being duly weigh'd, is there not some reason a litte to hesitate, and to doubt at least, whe­ther Mr. Oats (overpower'd by the two prevailing Mo­tives, first of revenge against the Jesuites, for not re­ceiving, and entertaining him any longer, and next of procuring a subsistance, which he then wanted) may not have invented that voluminous History of his Plott (which to all people knowing in the world hath the perfect air of a Romance; and whether Mr. Bedlow, Prance and Dug­dal (exalted from Goales to the glorious titles of the Kings Evidence, and saviours of their Countrey) may not also have been tempted, by the good success of their Leader Mr. Oats, and by indemnity, and rewards, to take upon them this gainful Trade of swearing? especially, since [Page 12] there are no visible, concurring circumstances, nor mat­ters of fact extant, and appearing to give any solidity to this aicry Plott: but all is made out purely by the dint of swearing, and only corroberated by the credulity of the people. Set now against this the Oaths and Protesta­tions of so many dying men; the reputation of those who are yet living, and accused; of whom many have been eminent (as in their quality) so for their service, and suf­fering in behalf of their King, and Countrey. And after all this, will it not become every sober man to pause a little, that their feet may not be too swift in shedding of blood? let something be left to God's manifestation, and let us not trust wholly to the Revelation of Oats, Bedlow, Prance and Dugdal, in a case of blood, and perhaps of in­nocent blood.

But before I proceed any further upon this Subject, I must warn my Reader, that I no wayes arraign the Justice of the Nation, or the Votes of both Houses in relation to this Plott: For according to the Informations at first brought before them of so horrid and bloody a Conspira­cy, they acted then like good Patriots, and like them­selves, in their zealous prosecution of it in order to the bringing the partyes accused to a just and legal Tryal. But then again, far be it from any man to believe, that those Honourable Patriots are more desirous of punish­ment to be inflicted, and of blood to be shed, then of Truth to be discovered: and since there is such a sin in the world as Perjury, so exterminating to mankind, and of so dangerous a Nature, that it hath even the Law, and Justice itself to back and protect it, till such a time as it is detected, and lifted out by the sagacity and discernment [Page 13] of able Judges; and since in our present cast there are pregnant symptomes, and indications superven [...] of that Civil Plague; It well may become the prudence and Ju­stice of all our Magistrates in general, after so much blood as hath been already shed upon the bare testimony of these men, without any real discovery of the things by them sworn, either by matter of Fact extant and appa­rent, or by the confession of any of the persons Executed, soberly to weigh, and examine, whether this legal way of murdering men (if that be the case) by false Oaths, ought not to be as narrowly sifted, and as exemplarly pu­nished in the Perjurers, as the crime of Rebellion (should that be true) in the Trayters.

Now in the last place, to convince all those, whose hearts are not of Pharo's temper, and whom the violence, of Passion has not totally deprived of all exercise of rea­son, I shall only take a short view of what was done in the Gunpowder-Treason, and compare those passages and the comportments of the Criminals upon that occa­sion, with these of our Modern pretended Conspirators.

In the first place there was then visible the overt act of barrels of Powder laid in the place.

2. There was the slight of some of the Conspirators, and their resistance at their taking.

3. Those that were executed, did all confess the fact at the time of Execution.

4. All persons indifferently, both Papists and Prote­stants, Forrainers and Natives believed the thing: and, although some Pamphlets were at that time written to extenuate the Fact, and the guilt in reference to some of the Party's therein concern'd, yet no soul living did then deny the thing it self.

[Page 14]How then comes it to pass, that in our present Conspi­racy, all things should rancounter, & Diametrically con­trary in every particular to what then happen'd; and to what ever did happen in all real Plotts, and Conspiracies since the Creation of the world?

First as to overt Acts, there is not here any matter of Fact visible, and apparent, that has any proper tendency or relation to a Conspiracy for destroying the King, and levying of War; but the whole Machine of this vast, and hideous Plott is built upon the bare testimony of the swea­rers.

Let not the death of Sr. Edmund Bury Godfrey be urged, as a matter of Fact, to prove this pretended Conspiracy, because the unfortunate end of that Gentleman, as to the true manner of it, is a Mistery yet unreveal'd, and is laid at the Papists dore, just as Antichrist is charged upon the Pope: all that would have it so, believe it to be so, Quae volumus, facile credimus: But I think, there are few unbi­as'd, and discerning men, who are convinced, that those poor creatures, who suffered death upon that account, were his true Murderers; nor can they rationally be so, until Mr. Prance, who once disclaimed his Evidence be­fore King and Councel, shall in the same circumstance of dying, declare their Guilt, in which they so solemnly declared their innocence, especially since [...]erry at the same time declared himself both innocent, & a Protestant.

As to the consult of the Jesuits on the 14th. of April, and those Letter of summons produced in order thereun­to I say that, if the meeting of the Jesuits at that time be an overt Act to prove a Conspiracy of Treason, then every third year since Jesuits were Jesuits, there has been a [Page 15] Plott; for they have constantly held (according to the Rule of their Order) those triennial meetings ever since their first foundation, as all the world abroad can testify.

By all this it appears, that there is no overt Act, not matter of Fact at all, to ground a Rational belief of this Plott; and that it is only supported by the breath of the witnesses coyned into Oaths.

2. Not one person accused in this pretended Conspi­racy did either fly, or abscond (except only the Priests, who were obnoxious to the Law for their Priesthood) nay the greatest part of them upon the first rumour of their accusation, came in and tendred themselves to answer their charge. And here (pray) let me ask every sober man, whether it be likely or possible, that amongst so many as are accused of this Treason, not one should be found, whose guilt, or fear would prevail upon him to fly and se­cure himself from the extreamest penalty of the Law, since it was universally known many days before any were apprehended, that Mr. Oats had made a discovery of a Plott the stoutest man, had he been guilty, would have fled upon such a warning: but the most timorous of na­ture did not fly, because he was innocent.

3. Of so many, that have been Executed for this Plott (horrid & bloody indeed, on one side or the other) all at their deaths have de­nyed the Fact; and although life be sweet, have resisted all tempta­tions of Pardon, and reward offered unto them, if they would but confess for themselves; and others what they were not guilty of.

And here again I must ask another question; and I beg of every one, who reads this Paper, to make an answer to it within himself, such as may fairly satisfy his own reason, and conscience. How comes it to pass that in all former Conspiracies, as that of Babing­ton in the dayes of Queen Elizabeth, and that of the Gunpowder-Treason [Page 16] in the Reign of King James, the Conspirators then should confess the Fact, many of them pleading guilty at their Arraign­ments, and all of them at their deaths acknowledging their Treasons and asking God and the King pardon for them? but in this Plott all to a man plead not guilty, protesting and declaring their innocence both at their [...], and Executions they dye praying for the King, praying for their Enemies, asking God and the world forgiveness for all their other sins and offences, but as to the Plott, affirming their innocence with their last breath, and sealing it with their blood? whence (I say) this vast difference in the comportments of these, and and of those? are they not all Papists? were there no [...] then Jesuits amongst them, as well as now? was there not a Garnet then confessing, as well as a Whit thread how denying, and both Provin­cials of their Order? haue they gotten a new Faith or a new Creed since those days? on is there not the same humane Nature in both? I challenge all mankind to assign a cause of this difference with the least colour of Reason and humanity, any otherwise, then by saying, what was said at the death of the just one, vere, hic homo justus erat.

4. As to the present belief of this Plott, I must confess, it does now pass as currant with the Rabble here, as the firing of Rome by the Christians in the days of Nero, did with the Populate of that City; and both have produced the like bloody effects. But since the blood of innocent men did never yet do hurt to themselves, or their party, we are to take such dispensations (according to God's own words) as marks of his Love, and as an earnest of better things to come. And such is the power of truth, that I dare affirm (not pretending to the gift of Prophesie) some years hence this Plott will no more be believed in England, than now it is believed that the Christians did burn Rome. The eyes of other Nations are general­ly opened already to see the imposture: and the impossibility of the thing, and the circumstances (taking the whole frame, & System of the Conspiracy, as layd down by Mr. Oats in his Narrative) is so manifest to all discerning men that few even Protestants in forreign parts take it to be any other, but a Pollitick engine to carry on far­ther designs.

I shall conclude with this hearty Prayer, that our merciful God may avert from our Nation those Judgements, which usually fol­low the crying sins of Perjury and blood.