CHAPTER XXV.
Now what is the Evidence to support the preceding paragraphs (1), (2), and (3)?
As to paragraph (1), the Evidence is direct.
There was a tradition extant that Mounteagle expected the Letter, told to a gentleman named Edmund Church his confidant. — See Gardiner’s “Gunpowder Plot,” p. 10.
Moreover, the fact that the footman was in the street at about seven of the clock when the missive was given to him is strongly suggestive of the fact that he had been anxiously sent thither by some one, so that he might be ready at hand to receive the document immediately on its arrival.
As to paragraphs (2) and (3), the Evidence is indirect and inferential.
It is this: — Thomas Ward was manifestly on excellent terms with Mounteagle on the one hand and with the conspirators on the other.
For it is evident that no sooner had Mounteagle arrived back from his errand of mercy on that dark night of Saturday, the 26th day of October, 1605, than he divulged to his servant almost all, if not quite all, that had passed at Whitehall during his never-to-be-forgotten interview with Salisbury, the King’s principal Secretary of State.[A]