Why did you not do that you came out of prison for? What, my lord, to kill the king? Yes, that.' This is an argument in opposition to his testimony.

a person guilty, or no? I am of opinion, it is but one witness, if you do not believe one; and I am sure one is not sufficient to find one guilty: And therefore if so be you are of another opinion, let us deal fairly and above-board, that it may appear we deal rightly between the king and his subjects, and so preserve men that are accused, and not guilty.

Just. Jones. I think, in the first place, my lord hath very faithfully delivered the evidence; and I do think it necessary, in a case of Treason, that there must be two witnesses believed by the jury.

The next is a consideration for his testimony. Turner says, in answer to that, in July he takes it, but cannot charge himself whether June, or July, or August, but he himself thinks July, that he saw him at the lord Castlemaine's house. And the king's counsel would gather from that, there could not be such an unwillingness to go before that time, it being after the time they speak of that this man saw him there. Whether or no it was in June, or July, Just. Raymond. I never heard any man quesor August, is something uncertain. So that I tion it. If the law says there must be two withave repeated, as near as I can, all that is sub-nesses produced, it says they must be both stantial on either part; and I have, according believed. to the best of my understanding, dealt fairly on both sides, and observed to you what hath been sworn against my lord, and what hath been said in contradiction to what they swear, and what appears upon record, as to Dangerfield.

There is a great deal of difference between Mr. Oates's testimony and Mr. Dangerfield's; for you may believe one, when you may perchance not believe another. There are not those things cast upon Mr. Oates that are upon Mr. Dangerfield. Now I must tell you, though they have produced two, if you believe but one, I think (if so be my brethren's opinions be otherwise, I would be very willingly contradicted in this matter) if two witnesses are produced, both speaking materially to the thing, the one is believed, and the other not. Whether upon these two witnesses the jury can find

L. C. J. Now you have our sense of it.
The Jury went from the bar, and returned.
Cl. of Cr. Are you all agreed of your ver
dict?
Jury. Yes.

Cl. of Cr. Who shall speak for you?
Jury. The foreman.

Cl. of Cr. Roger Palmer, esq.; earl of Castlemaine in the kingdom of Ireland, hold up thy hand, look upon the jury.

Cl. of Cr. Is Roger Palmer esq. earl of Castlemaine in the kingdoin of Ireland, Guilty of the High-Treason whereof he stands indicted, or Not Guilty?

Jury. Not Guilty.

Cl. of Cr. This is your verdict, you say he is
Not Guilty, so you say all?
Jury. Yes.

267. The Trial of HENRY CARR, or CARE, at the Guildhall of London, for a Libel: 32 CHARLES II. A. D. 1680.

AN information was filed in the Crown-office our now lord the king, at the parish of Sepulagainst Henry Carr, which sets forth, That a chres, London, a certain false, scandalous and certain plot of a traiterous conspiracy was malicious book, intituled, "The Weekly Packet lately had within this kingdom of England," of Advice from Rome, or the History of amongst divers false traitors of this kingdom of Popery," maliciously and unlawfully hath England, to put to death and murder our lord printed, and caused to be published: In which king Charles 2. and the government of this book is contained among other things, as folkingdom of England, and the sincere religion of loweth: There is lately found out by an exGod within this kingdom of England well and perienced physician, an incomparable medipiously established, to destroy and subvert,cament, called "The Wonder-working Plaisand the Romish religion within this kingdom ofter," truly Catholic in operation, somewhat England to introduce; and that also divers of kin to the Jesuits Powder, but more effectraitors for high-treason aforesaid, were law-tual. The virtues of it are strange and vafully convicted and attainted, and other per 'rious. It will make justice deaf as well as sons, for high-treason, aforesaid, were by due blind, takes out spots out of deepest treasons, course of law tried and acquitted. Neverthe-more cleverly than Castile-soap does common less, one Henry Carr, of the parish of Sepulchres, London, gent. knowing well the premises, but minding, and maliciously intending the government of the kingdom of England and the administration of justice in the same kingdom to scandalize, and to bring the same in contempt:

The 1st day of August, in the 31st year of

stains. It alters a man's constitution in two or three days, more than the virtuosos transfusion of blood in seven years. Is a great alexipharmic, and helps poisons, and those 'that use them. It miraculously exalts and pu'rifies the eye-sight, and makes people behold 'nothing but innocence in the blackest malefactors. It is a mighty cordial for a declining

'cause, stifles a plot as certainly as the itch is ⚫ destroyed by butter and brimstone. In a word, it makes fools wise men, and wise men fools, and both of them knaves. The colour of this 'precious balm ts bright and dazzling, and being applied privately to the fist in decent manner, and a competent dose, infallibly performs all the said cures, and many others not fit here to be mentioned.'*

To the great contempt of our lord the king and his laws, to the great scandal of the government of our now lord the king, and the laws of this kingdom of England, and the administra

tion of justice in the same kingdom; to the evil example of all others in such a case offending, and against the peace of our lord the king, his crown and dignity.

To which Information appeared in the Court of King's-Bench, Henry Carr, by his attorney, Benedict Brown, the 11th of February, and having heard the Information aforesaid, said that he was Not Guilty.

Issue being joined, it was tried by writ of Nisi Prius, at the Guild-hall, before the lord chief Justice Scroggs, upon the 2nd of July, 1680, where a jury was summoned, whose name are as followeth : Benj. Thorogood, Richard Blackbourne, Godfrey Richards, Leonard Bates, Phillip Harman, Francis Breerwood, Thomas Kemble, William Longman, John Debman, Lewis Wilson, Henry Loshoe, Thomas Salter, Jeremiah Gregory, Nich. Bondy, George Day, Nich. Dawes, Richard Blaney, Henry Averie, Joseph Hall, William Bridges, Thomas Lee, Richard White, Randal Dod, Richard Bowater. Of all which only four appeared and were sworn, viz. Nicholas Bondy, Leonard Bates, Henry Averie, Randal Dod. Whereupon a tales was prayed and granted, and then were sworn and added to the principal pannel, according to the form of the statute. Nicholas Caplin, Richard Cawtham, Arthur Young, Wil liam Yap, James Wood, Thomas Gilby, John Odensel, Emanuel Conyers.

After which the court proceeded, and the Recorder began to open the offence, as follows.

* "The Weekly Pacquet of Advice from Rome, &c." was first published on Tuesday December the 3rd 1678, and the three next numbers appeared respectively on the 10th, 17th and 24th of that month. Then the day of publication was changed from Tuesday to Friday for the convenience of dispatching the paper into the country by the post accordingly; the 5th number was published on Friday, January the 3rd, 1679. The work was continued until Friday, May 28, 1680; when I conjecture it ceased in consequence of the prosecution out of which arose the trial before us. In the year 1679, the first 31 numbers were published in a volume with this title, "The Weekly Pacquet of Advice from Rome, or the History of Popery: A deduction of the usurpations of the Bishops of Rome, and the errors and superstitions by them from time to time brought into the church. In the process of which the Papists arguments are answered, their fallacies detected, their cruelties registered, their treasons and seditious principles observed, and the whole body of Papistry anatomised, performed by a single sheet, coming out every Friday, but with a continual connexion." To each being added, "The "Popish Courant, or some occasional Joco-se"rious Reflections on Romish Fopperies." In the next year, the 47 succeeding numbers were collected into the "Second volume of the Weekly Pacquets of Advice from Rome, or History of Popery, displaying the horrid fives of the several bishops of Rome down to the year of our lord one thousand, and the usurpations, errors, and superstitions from time to time introduced or advanced in the church. Wherein also divers of our most important controversies with the Papists are fairly stated and argued, their argu-whatsoever that concerns the public, they gave ments solved, their objections answered, and the truth asserted, together with the Popish Courants, or, &c." Both volumes as well as the single numbers were published by Langley Curtis, on Ludgate Hill. [See the Case of Jane Curtis, in this Collection.]

Mr. Recorder. (Sir George Jefferies.) This person among others intending to scandalize the government, hath caused a book to be published, which I have here in my hand, called the Weekly Packet of Advice from Rome; there are some papers besides what are bound up together that are continued on, which, my lord, would not be amiss for us that are of the king's counsel to take notice of, not only for the jury's satisfaction, but likewise for the satisfaction of this great auditory, some whereof I know come to pick advantage, and to know whether or no rascals may have liberty to print what they please. Now all the judges of England having been met together, to know whether any person whatsoever may expose to the public knowledge any manner of intelligence, or any matter

it in as their resolution, that no person whatsoever could expose to the public knowledge any thing that concerned the affairs of the public, without licence from the king, or from such persons as he thought fit to entrust with that affair. But such is the age that we live in, that The passage which is set forth in the inform- a man that hath wit enough to libel any man ation is part of the "Popish Courant," No. 4, in the government, thinks he hath licence of the 24 volume. In the argumentative part enough to expose that man to public knowledge of the work there is much historical and contro, also. And they do it under specious pretences, versial learning. In the other part the at- because they think that any man may be extempts at wit are but rarely successful; the jo-posed to the public censure that they can either cularity is generally coarse and sometimes brutal. The whole is written with great acrimony,

call a papist, or but popishly affected, and that man is either the one or the other, that is not agreeable to every rascally humour that

some people affect. I acknowledge, my lord, that any man that will in a legal manner endeavour to suppress popery, ought to be encouraged in his endeavour, to the utmost; but if in case any man will be transported with zeal because he is of a party, and under pretence of endeavouring to suppress popery, should support a party, that man ought to be detected. The author of this Packet of Advice from Rome, or the publisher of it, Mr. Carr, that is now the defendant, he thinks he can scratch the itch of the age, and that he may libel any man concerned in the government, if he can but call him a papist, or popishly affected; let a man be never so honest let a man be never so much for the support of that religion that every honest man ought to support that is, the Protestant Religion, as it is established by law, without, going to Rome or Amsterdam for assistance. I will not mention the persons that are concerned in it, but I will apply myself wholly to this matter, that it is the opinion of all the judges of England that it is the law of the land, that no person should offer to expose to public knowledge any thing that concerns the government, without the king's immediate licence. Now we are to try whether this person exposed this thing to public knowledge, and that is the matter, gentlemen, that you are to try. The other is the business of the court; we are to say whether if we prove the fact, this man is guilty of punishment, and no doubt the justice of the nation will punish him. But when I see so many swarm about me, I am willing to hear what proof there is.

Sir Fr. Winnington. I am of counsel for the defendant, I only offer it to your lordship, that the information may be proved.

L. C. J. Here are two things we are to keep to, the matter of proof according to the information, and accordingly are we to proceed as in common justice we find the case to be. I must say that for the prisoner, he has behaved himself with as much modesty as in duty and honesty he ought; but I find chat Sir Fr. Winnington puts you upon proving.

Sir F. Withins. My Lord, we will prove it. L. C. J. (Sir William Scroggs.) Let them that are not of the jury go forth, the jury is no more to be corrupted than the judge,

Sir Francis Withins. We must be allowed the first part, that there was a plot.

L. C. J. The jury may take that upon their oaths, they know there was a plot the certainest of any thing of fact that ever came before me.

Mr. Stevens, Printer.

L. C. J. Did Mr. Carr own he writ this packet, had you any from him?

Printer. I had several from him.

L. C. J. Of whom else had you any?
Recorder. Besides Carr ?

L. C. J. You are upon your oath; from whom ever had you any besides?

Printer. I do not remember that I had any from any body else.

L. C. J. You printed them, did you?
Printer. Yes, my lord, I did.

L. C. J. And you know of none from any else, but by him or his orders? Printer. No, My lord.

Sir Fr. Winnington. Shew him the paper. Canyou swear upon your oath, that Mr. Carr did send or deliver to you that very paper? Printer. I cannot tell that any body else did send it.

L. C. J. We must do here, as we do in all cases: he saith, I had divers of these papers from him, I printed them, and I know of none that ever was but by him or his order.

Sir Fr. Winnington. He saith so, but, my lord, the information is to such a particular book entitled, "A Pacquet of Advice from Rome."

L. C. J. He says this in answer to it, I can't charge myself with this particular to say posi tively I had it from him: but this I can say, we had several from him, and I know of none else, but all were by him or his order.

Sir F. Winnington. Will your lordship give me leave to ask him one question? Can you swear that any that came from him contained the very matter in that book? Was it the matter or words?

Recorder. Do you believe it?

Sir F. Winnington. Good Mr. Recorder, let me alone. Can you say it is the very matter contained in that paper?

Printer. I can't say that.

L. C.J. It is not an easy matter for a man to remember the matter of a paper that is writ on all sides. He swears that they had several; and that they had none, though he printed them, from any but him or his order. This question sir Francis Winnington asks, Had you this particular paper from him? He cannot swear it was the same he had from him; but he does swear, all the Weekly Intelligences were from him or his order; he does not swear for the matter of this book, which no man will do: but he does swear that these papers were always by him or his orders, and that several were re ceived from him.

Mr. Williams. I ask you upon your oath, he brought it to you in writing, did he not? Printer. They came in writing.

Mr. Williams. Have you any of these papers to shew?

Printer. We did not regard them when they were printed.

L. C. J. His cause shall be tried very justly and very indifferently.

Mr. Williams. Had you ever a paper from
Carr's hand or no?

Printer. We had few from bis own hand.
Mr. Williams. Had you any?

Printer. I can't remember.

L. C. J. Had you any? You are upon your oath.-Printer. My Lord, I can't remember. L. C. J. Had you one, or two?

Printer. Indeed my lord, I cannot remember, I cannot say upon my oath he ever brought

one.

Printer. This is my servant, I am not always there.

Mr. Carr own to you that he sent the boy to have it printed?-Printer. No, Sir, I think not. L. C. J. That is the same question asked before. Did Mr. Carr ever own it as his, or no? Upon your oath, did Carr own this packet to be his, when you discoursed with him about it?

Printer. My lord, I humbly crave your leave to explain myself. I mean by the discourse I had, common conversation, as the drinking a glass of wine; but I know not that ever we discoursed upon this thing,

L. C.J. I mean so? When you talked about this matter, did you take it, by his discourse, for granted, that he was the man that published it?

Printer. I took it for granted, because I had it from him.

L. C. J. What say you to this? have you blamed Carr for writing too sharply in this book against the government?

Printer. My lord, I do confess I have.

L. C. J. What answer hath he made, when you blamed him for writing too sharply, as you thought? Did he deny that he did it?

Printer. I don't remember that.

L. C. J. What sort of answer did he make to excuse it? that he thought it not too sharp; or did he say, I care not.

Printer. My lord, I can't particularly say what answer he made.

L. C. J. When you blamed him, by the oath you have taken, upon that blame of yours, did he deny he wrote it?

Printer. No, my lord, I do not remember he did.

Mr. Williams. Did Carr at any time deny he was the author or publisher of it?

Printer. He hath at some times.
Mr. Williams. What did he deny?
Printer. That he was the author.
Mr. Williams. Of what book?
Printer. Of the Packet?

L. C. J. Did he deny he was the author of this particular book for this week, or deny it in general? Did he deny in general that he was the author of that book that is called, "The Packet of Advice?"

Printer. I have heard him say sometimes

that he was not the author.

Recorder. And sometimes what?

Sir Fr. Winnington. My lord, I would ask this man a question. This printed paper that is put in the information, did he ever deliver that to you?

Man. I can't speak particularly to any one.
Recorder. But generally to all?

L. C. J. Have you done?

Mr. Williams. I ask you a question.

L. C. J. If you could, Mr. Williams, shew me any author besides Mr. Carr, I would say something.

Mr. Williams. Who brought you this paper?
Man. Which paper?

Mr. Williams. I don't speak of this paper particularly. Did any bring any besides Carr? Man. Yes, his boy.

Mr. Williams. Did any body else bring any from any place?

Man. Nobody else that I know of.

Mr. Williams. The packet he brought you, had it been printed before? I ask you upon your oath, was it printed before he brought it?

L. C. J. Did he bring papers to print that were never printed?

of.

Man. They were never printed that I know

Mr. Williams. Did he bring any to print?
Man. I can't say he brought any.
Mr. Williams. Did Mr. Carr bring any?
Man. No, the boy.

Mr. Williams. Who directed you to print them? Did Carr direct you?

Man. I can't tell, I am a servant in the house.

L. C. J. I will assure you, a Non est Fac'tum' can't pass at this rate.

Justice Jones. Who did you take to be the man that sent you all the packets?

Man. I very seldom took any, because I was not always in sight.

L. C. J. Who did you understand?
Man. I understood they came from Mr.
Carr.

L. C. J. Have you any more? Read the words in the Information.

Clerk. Friday the 1st of August, 1679. "There is lately found out by an experienced physician, an incomparable medicament, call ed, The Wonder-Working Plaister; truly Ca

Printer. I have heard him say some time or tholic in operation; somewhat of kin to the other, that he was not the author.

Recorder. And what else?

The Printer's Servant,

Mr. Williams. Are you acquainted with Carr?

Man. I never had any converse with him. Mr. Williams. Do you know any thing of the Packet of Advice?

Man. I know we have had Packets from him: I fetched some from him.

Mr. Williams. What, from his hands?
Man. Yes.

Mr. Williams. What, from his own hands?
Yes, in pieces, no whole sheets.

Jesuits Powder, but more effectual. The vir tues of it are strange and various. It makes justice deaf, as well as blind, and takes out spots of the deepest Treason more cleverly than Castile-Soap does common stains. It alters a man's constitution in two or three days, more than the Virtuosis Transfusion of Blood in seven years. It is a great alexipharmie, ard helps poisons and those that use them. It m raculously exalts and purifies the eye-sight, and makes people behold nothing but innocency in the blackest malefactors. It is a mighty cor dial for a declining cause; it stifles a plot as certainly as the itch is destroyed by butter and brinstone. In a word, it makes fools wise