Mr. Att. Gen. So much we shall make ufe of; if the Colonel please to have any other part read to explain it, he may.

Then the sheets were fhewn to Col. Sydney.

Col. Sydney. I do not know what to make of it, I can read it.

L. C. J. Ay, no doubt of it, better than any man here. Fix on any part you have a mind to have read. Col. Sydney. I do not know what to fay to it, to read it in pieces thus.

L. C. J. I perceive you have difpofed them under certain heads: to what heads will you have read?

Col. Sydney. My lord, let him give an account of it that did it.

Mr. Att. Gen. My lord, we will not delay colonel Sydney from entering on his defence; only we have this piece of evidence to give further. One of his complices was my lord Ruffel, we will give in evidence his conviction. We will only afk my lord Howard, was your lordship fworn as a witnefs at the trial of my lord Ruffel? Lord Howard. Yes.

Mr. Att. Gen. Whether or no, when you met, were there in thofe debates any reflections upon the king, that he had broken his duty?

Lord Howard.

Mr. Att. Gen.

Not that I remember.

Why would you rife?

Lord Howard. If you mean upon the mifgovernment, not perfonally upon the king?

Mr. Att. Gen. Ay.

Lord Howard. Yes, and principally and chiefly that,

which we thought was the general difguft of the nation, the impofing upon the city at that time.

Mr. Juft. Wythins. That was complained of at that time?

Lord Howard. Yes, my lord: we took it all along to be the chief grievance.

L. C. J. Have you any more witnesses?

Mr. Att. Gen. Only the record.

Mr. Sol. Gen. I know there is no time mifpent to make things clear. If the jury have a mind to have the words read again—

L. C. 7. If they have a mind, let it.

Then Mr. Trinder was fworn, and teftified it to be a true copy of the record, and faid he examined it at Fishmonger's-Hall with Mr. Tanner.

Then the record of the conviction of the Lord Ruffel

was read.

L. C. J. What will you go to next, Mr. Attorney? Mr. Sol. Gen. We have done, unless the jury defire to have the words of the libel read again. [But they did not.]

Col. Sydney. My lord, I defire to know upon what ftatute I am indicted.

Mr. Att. Gen. My lord, I will give as plain an anfwer: you are indicted upon the old ftatute of 25 E. 3.

Col. Sydney. Then I defire to know upon what branch of that ftatute.

Mr. Att. Gen. Why, I will acquaint you: 'tis upon the first branch of that statute, for confpiring and compaffing the death of the king.

Col.

Col. Sydney. Then I conceive, what does not come within that, does not touch me.

Mr. Att. Gen. Make what inferences you please, Colonel, we will answer you.

Col. Sydney. I defire to know what the witneffes have fworn against me upon that point?

Mr. Att. Gen. Go on, you have heard the witneffes as well as we.

L. C. J. He fays you are indicted upon the ftatute of 25 E. 3. which statute makes it high treafon to confpire the death of the king; and the overt-act is fufficiently fet forth in the indictment; now the question is, whether 'tis proved?

Col. Sydney. They have proved a paper found in my ftudy of Caligula and Nero, that is compaffing the death of the king, is it?

L. C. J. That I fhall tell the jury. The point in law you are to take from the court, gentlemen: whether there be fact fufficient, that is your duty to confider.

• Col. Sydney. I fay, my lord, that fince I am indicted upon that ftatute, I am not to take notice of any other. I am indicted for confpiring the death of the king, becaufe fuch a paper is found in my houfe. Under favour, I think that can be nothing at all to me: for though fir Philip Lloyd did afk me, whether I would put my feal o it, he did not ask me till he had been in my clofet, and I knew not what he had put in; and so I told him I would not do it. Then come thefe gentlemen upon fimilitude of hands. My lord, we know what fimilitude of hands is in this age. One told me within thefe two days,

that

that one came to him, and offered him to counterfeit any hand he should fhew him in half an hour. So then, my lord, I have nothing to fay to thefe papers. Then for point of witness, I cannot be indicted, much less tried or condemned, on 25 E. 3. for by that act there must be two witnefics to that very branch unto which the treason does relate, which must be diftinguished. For the levy ing of war, and confpiring the death of the king, are two diftinct things, diftinct in nature and reafon, and fo dif tinguished in the ftatute. And therefore the confpiring the death of the king is treafon, and the other not. 1 E. 6. 12. 5 E. 6. 11. does exprefsly fay, there must be two witneffes to either of these acts. Now here is my lord Howard (I have enough to fay of him by and by) 'tis he only who speaks of fix men, whom he calls a felect council, and yet felected by no man in the world. I de fire to know who felected my lord Howard? Who selected me? If they were felected by no body, 'tis a bull to fay they were a felect council. If they were not selected, but erected themselves into a cabal, then they have either confidence in one another, or find they are nearly equally able to affift in the defign. Here is nothing of all this: these fix men were ftrangers to one another. For my own part, I never fpake with the duke of Monmouth above three times in my life, and one time was when my lord Howard brought him to my house and cozened us both. He told the duke I invited him, and he told me the duke invited himself; and neither of them was true. Now, that fuch men as thefe are, not knowing hardly one another, should presently fail into a great and intimate friend

hip, and truft and management of fuch bufineffes as thefe are, is a thing utterly improbable, unless they were mad. Now I do find in my lord Howard's depofition against my lord Ruffel, that they were in profecution of my lord Shafifbury's defign; and yet he acknowledges the duke of Monmouth faid he was mad, and he himself faid fo too. Now that they should join with four more in the profecution of the defign of a madman, they must be mad

too.

Now whether my lord Howard would have you think he was mad because a madman cannot be guilty of treafon, I cannot tell. My lord Howard in his last depofition at my lord Ruffel's trial, fixes the two meetings, one about the middle of January, the other ten days after: how he fixes one to be the latter end of January, the other the middle of February. Then he makes it to be the profecution of my lord Shaftsbury's defign. I do not find that any one there had any thing to do with my lord Shaftsbury: for my part I had not; I had not seen his face in two years. Then, my lord, that I go upon is, whatever my lord Howard is, here is but one witness. The law of God and the law of man, understood and taken by all men, does require two witneffes: Mofes

3

fays

* « Mr. Pelham. I did prefume yeterday to tell you, that Mr. Alger "non Sydney did and upon it as his natural right, that they could not pro "ce-d against him, there being but one witness. I did not bring his cafe "as parallel to this, nor think that his authority fhould influence you. But "he was a man, that had that love for Liberty and the good of his Country, that he would not have faid fo, even to five his own life, if he had thought it incon "fftent with either of them. But I have looked upon his trial fince, and there. he does declare, That the being condemned by two witnelles is the law "of God and the law of man, the juft law that is obferved by all men, and in all places. 'Tis certain he reached even by thefe words the power of "Parliament: when I do fay power, I do not mean, but that when fuch

a law