HOra mortis, hora veritatis, is an uſual Saying, and the Product of a Chriſtian Charity, preſuming all Men to be Men, and to have knowledge of an Eternal State, and ſome dread of God upon their Souls: but it faileth in ſeveral Caſes. 1. Where Perſons in that hour have no juſt uſe of their Reaſon; and ſo ſpeak they know not what. 2. Where the Perſon is not ſure of his Death, but is muzzled up in an hope of Life, if he will ſpeak to ſuch a ſenſe. 3. Where the Perſon is ignorant, or Atheiſtical; either not knowing. or not believing an Eternal State. Or, 4. Where the Party, though believing an Eternal State, yet is perſuaded, that the neareſt way to it is by ſpeaking falſe, to ſave the Repute of a Sham-Religion, into which he hath been Baptized, and in which he hath lived. In the firſt Caſe, the ſame Reaſon that alloweth no great Credit to be given to one mad or drunk, in his Fits, while he liveth, will alſo diſcharge our Charity for giving their Dying Words no more credit. The Reaſon for the ſecond is as plain, becauſe the onely Reaſon of Mens charitable Preſumption in that Caſe, is our fancy of the Perſons Apprehenſion, that he is preſently going before the Tribunal of the juſt Judge of the whole Earth, who hath told us, that all Liars ſhall go into the Lake which burns with Fire and Brimſtone. Now he who hath no ſuch Apprehenſion, hath no more credit due to his Words dying, than when he was living; nay, ſo much leſs, as he valueth Life, which he hopes may be prolonged by Lying. For the third, whoſo conſidereth, that the Reaſon why Charity directs more credit to the Words of a dying than of a living Man, is, becauſe it preſumes a Chriſtian, poſſeſſed with the belief of an Immortal State, and Eternity, and of the truth of Holy Writ, will without difficulty underſtand why the Words of a dying Man, that either doth not know, or, though he hath heard ſuch things, yet accounteth them Romantiquè, deſerve no more credit than they had due to them when the Perſon was at furtheſt diſtance from his Latter-end; eſpecially if he ſuffereth as a Malefactor: for though it may be he either knoweth not or believeth not that he hath an Immortal Soul, capable of eternal Happineſs or Miſery, yet he cannot but know that his Repute will out-live him, and when he is dead he will be yet ſpoken of, and his Relations alſo will be a little concerned in the Worlds Diſcourſes of him, may juſtly be preſumed, not knowing of any inconvenience from falſe Diſcourſes tending to that end, to lie for his and his Families and Friends Reputation. And in the fourth Caſe it is as plain, adm •• ting a Man to believe an Eternity, and the Immortallity of the Soul in Bliſs or Miſery; yet 〈◊〉 he believeth that the neareſt way in his State to that Bliſs, is to tell Lies for the Glory of God (as he is perſuaded), to uphold the Reputation of the Church (the onely true Apoſtolick Church), and the true Catholick Religion, he hath all the reaſon in the World, and it is a great piece of his Religion, to die with a Lie in his Mouth; that is, an highly officious Lie; and ſo far from guilt, that it becometh meritorious. The third of theſe is the Caſe of too many who are no pr • feſt Papiſts. Some ſcores die by the Hand of the Executioner every year, boldly denying what muſt be true, or double the number of them (not tainted with any ill Repute) muſt be perjured; and an eaſie Judgment will determine, That a double or treble number of Perſons, of known Integrity, are rather to be believed upon their Oaths, than half or a third part of that number are, who have been ignorant and Atheiſtical Perſons (of no repute) during the time of their Lives, dying without any ſenſe of their other Sins, or due knowledge of the Principles of Religion; which hath put me into ſome admiration of the Credulity of ſome amongſt us, who will ſo often ſay of Perſons profeſſing our own Religion, (though they have died denying the Fact for which they have died) Doubtleſs they were guilty, whatever they ſaid at the Gallows; that they ſhould ſo eaſily credit Papiſts dying Words, contrary to the moſt evident proof; eſpecially conſidering, that by the Principles of Popery, and the Determination of the generality of their Directors of Conſciences, Papiſts may tell Lies in an hundred Caſes, and in ſome Caſes ought to do it; which is directly contrary to all the Principles of that Religion which Proteſtants profeſs. The fourth is the Caſe of Papiſts, who do not onely judge that jocoſe Lies are no Sins, and officious Lies (to ſave themſelves, without wronging others) but venial Sins; but pernicious Lies alſo, ſuch as are to the injury of others, and the violation of Juſtice, in many Caſes, either not Sins, or very little ones, attoned preſently by Confeſſion; as, in caſe they do not tend to ſome notable damage of others; of which I hope their Prieſts muſt be Judges. He who will read in Engliſh what their Divines ſay in this Caſe, may find it in a Book called The Practical Divinity of Papiſts, p. 248, 249, &c. And if any deſire to have it from the Pens of their Divines themſelves, he ſhall find them there quoted to his full ſatisfaction. And if it be meritorious to lie for the Catholick Cauſe, Lying with them in their hour of death, for the Credit of their Church or pretended Religion, is plainly the neareſt way the Malefactors of that Religion can take to go to Heaven. But yet when any of theſe Perſons tell or write Lies, at ſuch a diſtance from the hour of their Death, that they have time to make Confeſſion and take Abſolution, according to their Religious Principles, they are as innocent as the Child unborn. So that I confeſs I have not been much affected with the Writings, or pretended Writings, or Speeches of Men of this Religion, ſome ſhort time before their Death, or in their dying hour; and have had a great temptation upon me to think, that thoſe Proteſtants who have been moved at them. have been very ignorant of their Principles, or at beſt too much inclinable to their Religion; they would never elſe at that rate defame their own Religion, by denying or queſtioning the truth of what hath been ſaid by thoſe who have been bred and lived in the Profeſſion of it, and credited the Romiſh Religion, by a credulity of any thing the Profeſſors of that ſay, becauſe (forſooth) they are Dying Words; as if Proteſtants might (I am ſure by their Principles they may not) die with Lies in their Mouths; but Papiſts (who by their Principles may, and perhaps ought) may not do the ſame. But amongſt all the moſt notorious Shams of this nature, there hath been none ſo foul and impudent as that which we have in a late Pamphlet entituled, The Confeſſion of Edward Fitz-Harys Eſq written with his own Hand, and delivered to Dr. Hawkins Miniſter in the Tower, 1. July, 1681, being the day of his Execution.

I muſt confeſs, I have often wondred that the Magiſtrates of this Noble City, being Men of ſo great Loyalty and Integrity, and who have lately been reflected on for ſuffering Pamphlets with ill Reflexions to His Majeſty to be printed and ſold, have nor before this time bound over to the Seſſions the Publiſhers of that impudent Pamphlet, which reflects upon His Majeſty to a degree beyond any Pamphlet that I have met with, and ſuch a one as no good Subject ought to have patience for. For, conſidering that the Trial and Execution of that wretched Villain were both •… cted by His Majeſty, he muſt have entertained moſt vile Thoughts of His Majeſty, that can believe Fitz-Harys, ſaying,—As to the Crimes for which I die, I was no further concerned in the Libel, than as EMPLOYED to give the King notice of what Libels and other Accuſations were againſt him and to this intent, and no other, I endeavoured to get this Libel. This he repeats again in his Speech at his Execution; and he further tells the Reader, Mrs. Wall was ſhe by whoſe Hands he conveyed ſuch Libels, and he was taken with this Libel while he was going to my Lord Clarendon or Hyde. Can any who hath one dram in him either of Loyalty or Reaſon, believe this? And will not all the World both admire the Loyalty, Reaſon, or Policy of him who was the Man-Midwife to this ſpurious Pamphlet, and the Sponſor for it too?

After ſuch an avowed Piece of Villany and Falſhood as this, is it at all to be admired, that he ſaith againſt my Lord Howard, or indeed any other? All which may be reaſonably preſumed as true, as that he had no other concern in the Libel than what he mentioneth: for, if he had no concern in the firſt compoſing of it, or adding to it, or diſpenſing of it, they muſt have ſtrange Apprehenſions of their Sovereign, that will think he ſhould for a Piece of Loyalty and Service, direct this Man's Tryal and Execution. He who can believe this, may eaſily believe what he ſaith elſe, which cannot reaſonably be thought to be more true than this idle and ſcandalous Story, having as much, yea more, the Emphaſis of Dying Words (for it is repeated at his Execution again) than any thing elſe he ſaid. But it is evident, that he who drew up that Paper, had a thouſand times more regard to the Reputation of a Roman Catholick, and the Reputation of the Church and Religion of Rome, than to the Reputation and Honour of His Sacred Majeſty, His moſt Honourable Council, and the Reverend Judges: And thoſe that publiſh or vouch it, fall not much leſs under the ſame ſuſpicion.

What Everard is, or what Parts he hath to fit him to draw Libels, I cannot tell; but it is not probable that the King, or His Honourable Council, or His Judges, believed a word of what he ſaith, That he had the Libel from Everard; for then Everard, in ſtead of being pardoned, and uſed as a Witneſs, had doubtleſs been indicted and proſecuted as the Principal, in as foul a piece of Villany as ever was acted upon an Engliſh Theatre. For it had been the higheſt Injuſtice imaginable, to have proceeded ſo ſeverely againſt an Acceſſary, (yea, no Acceſſary, if what he ſaid before of his Employ be true) and to have let the Principal go free.

For what he ſaith of my Lord Howard, I ſhall leave it to time to diſcover the truth or falſhood of it; but it is all prefaced with ſuch an apparent Lie as he had juſt before told about the Libel, and his onely concern in it. Admit my Lord Howard had had or known of ſ • ch a Deſign as he mentions, it is hard to imagine what could move him to communicate it to ſuch a Fellow, who as he lived upon others Trenchers, and was not likely to have advantaged it by his Purſe; ſo having never riſen higher in Military Affairs than an ordinary Captain or Enſign (in which Employ his famous Military E • ploits are yet to be made known to the World too) it is as hard to conceive how he could advantage it by his Arms or Intereſt; ſo as we that live abroad in the Wo • ld cannot fancy my Lord Howard ſhould communicate ſuch things to him, unleſs his Lordſhip had a mind to capacitate a Witneſs or two to take away his Life, of which I never heard that his Lordſhip had reaſon to be weary.

His next Paragraph ſufficiently reflects upon our two Sheriffs. Men known to all the City to be Men of Integrity and Truth: He ſaith they came to him in Newgate (that is, March 12. for after that they ſaw him not, he was the next day removed to the Tower,) he ſaith. They told him that he was to be tried within three or four days [that muſt be at furtheſt by March 14.] That the People would Proſecute him, and the Parliament would Impeach him. Within a few Lines after, he ſaith, The Sheriffs brought inſtructions, which they ſaid came from the Lords and Commons, who met that day in order to Addreſs to the King on his behalf, if he ſhould confirm the Inſtructions. Fitz-Harys could not but know, that the Parliament was Proclaimed to meet at Oxford, March 21. The Sheriffs came to him the Tenth of March, to inform him he would be Tried by the Fourteenth of March, and that not at the Suit of the King (which might have been true), but at the Proſecution of the People, upon the Impeachment of the Commons, which could not poſſibly be till March 24, or 25. For they met out the 21. and two or three days muſt at leaſt be allowed them to ſwear their Members, and ſettle their Great Committees, before they could think of Impeachments. Now is it not likely that the Sheriffs ſhould tell him a Story which himſelf could not but know was impoſſible, and they muſt know was no leſs than a moſt impudent Lie?

In the next place he reflects upon our Renowned Recorder: He brings him in ſwearing, Gods-wounds, what were you ever but a Rogue? Let all who ever converſed with Sir George teſtifie, whether he be a Perſon ever uſed his Tongue to ſuch a Dialect: It is not very probable that his firſt Oath ſhould be Gods-wounds, eſpecially to a Priſoner, and upon no further Provocation than the Paper mentioneth.

The Integrity of Sir Robert Clayton and Sir George Treby is too well known, for any but Papiſts to believe they would either of them ſollicit ot ſubborn Men againſt the Duke, and the Lords Bellaſis, Arundel, and Powis; beſides that Sir George Treby knew ſo much of what was depoſed before the Committee of Secreſie, that he could not but know, that againſt the Lords in the Tower there was no need of ſuch Arts for Witneſſes, more than againſt Lord Stafford, if his Conſcience would have diſpenſed with ſuch Villany.

But the impudent Author of that Pamphlet will not allow Sir George the Diſcretion of an ordinary Petti-Conſtable; for (if any body would believe him) either Sir George, or my Lord Shaftsbury (who, by the way, was not in Newgate with him) ſaid to him, You know more of theſe Matters than any Man. Then he addeth, Sir George would have had me ſpeak to the Conſult, That the Duke was at it, the Lords Arundel, Bellaſis, and Powis were at it; you have ſeen them go to it at St. Jameſes, without doubt they were there: DO YOƲ BƲT SAY IT, WE HAVE THOSE THAT WILL SWEAR IT. Sir George is a Perſon not onely of known Integrity, but alſo Skill in the Laws, and is looked upon as a Perſon not ordinarily verſed in Men. Would any ſilly Conſtable of a Pariſh have ſpoken this Language to one that had been his Priſoner? Or was there ever any ſuch Intimacy betwixt Fitz-Harys and Sir George, as he could be preſumed to have thus expoſed his Honour and Reputation to him? Or could Sir George (had he been never ſo viciouſly diſpoſed) have ſuch a confidence in a Villain, who but a day or two before had been accuſed of High-Treaſon by Sir William Waller, &c? If ever the Popiſh Faction were infatuated in any thing, it certainly was in this, in publiſhing to the World a Story, which if any credulous Fool could imagine the leaſt truth in, yet a Man of the leaſt ſenſe muſt judge it to have ſuch degrees of improbability in it, as a known Lie might have expected an eaſier Credit to.

For what he ſaith next, retracting what he had ſaid about Sir Edmondbury Godfrey's Murther, and the Earl of Darby, &c. it might have obtained ſome credit with ſome, had not it been known, that Sir Edmondbury was certainty murthered in Somerſet-houſe; and that beſides the abundant Evidence of certain Papiſts murthering him, it is moſt certain alſo, that thoſe of that Religion were thoſe who raiſed the Reports, That he was alive, and gone to marry Mrs. Offlet: Then, That he was a melancholy Man, and had murthered himſelf: And had they not lately found out one to witneſs be cut him down, with abundance of more Circumſtances of that nature? Though what Conſults and Deliberations were previous to it, I know not of any that diſcovered, till Fitz-Harys appear'd: And for his ſaying now, He was put upon it, he ſhould have done well to have ſaid by whom; for certain it is, that what he ſaid of this nature was in Weſtminſter-hall, at his Arraignment, many Weeks after the Recorder, or Sir Robert Clayton, or the Sheriffs had ſpoke to him. In his Examination before Sir George Treby and Sir Robert Clayton, 10 March, he ſaid no more than that De Puy told him, That that Murther was conſulted at Windſor; and that in Appil, 1680. Kelly told him at Calais, That he was one of the Perſons concerned in the Murther, and that the ſame was done much in manner as Prance had related it. After that time he could not be put upon it by any that went to him to Newgate.

For the Earl of Danby, beſides the Reflexion caſt upon him by the Narrative of Mr. Chriſtopher Kirkby, which tells us, That upon Auguſt 13. Mr. Kirkby preſented His Majeſty with the Firſt Diſcovery, brought him by Dr. Tonge, who referred Mr. Kirkby to the Earl of Danby, ordering Dr. Tonge and Mr. Kirkby to wait on the Earl the next Morning, Auguſt 14. which they did; but nothing was done in it, nor a Perſon apprehended of ſix Weeks after, and that upon another Information, given in to Sir Edmondbury Godfrey, Sept. 6. Sir Edmondbury Godfrey read not the Information, as appears by the Narrative, it having been Three Weeks before delivered to the Earl of Danby. September 28. (ſaith that Narrative) was the firſt time Sir Edmondbury Godfrey read the Informations, when alſo he took the Copy of them; then began the Proſecution, full Six Weeks after the Earl of Danby firſt had them: This begat in ſome, ſome hard thoughts of the Earl; but yet ſo free was the Proteſtant Party from charging the Earl of Danby with that Guilt, that when a Sheet of Paper came out, called, Reflexions on the Earl of Danby, with reference to that Murther, a Vindication of him from that Charge was alſo publiſhed, by him that put out Mr. Kirkby's Narrative, and ordinarily ſold with it: many ſober Perſons apprehending, that the Deſign of that Paper reflecting on his Lordſhip was meerly Popiſh, that the Papiſts by it might throw on the Earl the Odium of that Murther. Though it was true, the Publiſher of that Paper ſeemed not to anſwer all that was in the Paper of Reflexions; for though it ſufficiently vindicates the Earl from any Capacity of Concealment of Treaſon, His Majeſty having had the firſt Information, and giving the Earl the Informations brought to him; yet others thought it did not vindicate him from the Non-preſecution of the Informations from Augvſt 14. to Septemb. 28. and not proſecuting it then until Sir Edmondbury Godfrey had received the ſame Informations, and given them in to the Council, keeping a Copy of them: And many wondred that there was nothing ſaid to what was ſuggeſted in that Paper, That Sir Edmondbury Godfrey dined at the Earl of Danby's that day in which he was murthered; and that none is yet diſcovered who ſaw him that Afternoon, after he had been in Mr. Chriſtian's Company (who was my Lord of Danby's Gentleman) till he was murthered. But it ſufficiently appears how little any conſiderable Proteſtants judged my Lord of Danby concerned in that matter, till Fitz-Harys himſelf diſcovered what he here retracts. Here any may judge how likely he was to be put upon it, unleſs it were by his Confeſſor, who might have a g 〈…〉 e the Odium of that foul Act from off their Church or Party.

He ſaith farther, And what I ſaid concerning Fitz-Patrick was ſerced out of me, and what I ſaid concerning him is not true. This looks ſo like an Interpolation of a Popiſh Prieſt (to clear their Church), as it is hardly poſſible any ſhould believe it to be any other. Who charged Fitz-Patrick? or thought him more concerned in this Plot than moſt of their Prieſts, till Fitz-Harys firſt ſtained his Reputation? How then could any body force an Accuſation of him out of him?

Nor doth his further calling of God and all his Angels to witneſs the Truth of what he ſaid, or his renouncing Mercy at the hands of God Almighty, at all contribute to the Credit of what he ſaid: For there are ſeveral Lies in it, evident to all our Engliſh World; and thoſe kind of Appeals and Atteſtations, where the Matter is ſo, ſignifie nothing, but that ſuch of that Religion as uſe them are Atheiſts as well as Papiſts, or have a great confidence in their Confeſſors Abſolutions after ſuch Confeſſions: And it may be, to give ſome due time for Confeſſion and Abſolution after ſuch notorious things, it is of late that they have rather choſen to write ſomething aforehand, than to ſpeak much at the Hour of the Execution.