No Protestant-Plot; or the present pretended Conspiracy of Protestants against the King and Government discovered to be a conspiracy of the Papists against the King and his Protestant Subjects. London. 1681.
For printing this book, a prosecution was instituted against Richard Baldwin of the parish of St. Sepulchre in London. The information charges that the defendant, being a malicious and a seditious man, and contriving and maliciously intending to disturb the peace and common tranquillity of this kingdom, and to excite, move, and procure discord between the king and his subjects, and to bring into hatred and contempt the king's government and the due course of law of this kingdom, did, on the twentieth day of October in the thirty-third year of the reign of King Charles the Second, in the parish of St. Sepulchre aforesaid, falsely, unlawfully, wickedly, maliciously, seditiously, and scandalously cause to be printed, sold and published, a certain false, malicious, scandalous and seditious libel, intituled No Protestant Plot, containing among other things as follows:—The King is of too much goodness, and a Prince of Greater Wisdom and more unstained justice, than that any of his subjects should apprehend or fear anything illegal from him while he acts free and unconstrained; but how far his Ministers, especially those who have been exasperated by the proceedings of Parliaments, may render his Authority a cloak to their malice, and make the pretence of his preservation and safety subservient to their revenge, is what we are jealous of. And tho' we would fain persuade ourselves that they are persons of more honour and integrity than to make reprisals upon the Lives of Peers for the injury which they suppose was done them; yet the imprisoning my Lord Shaftsbury upon the credit of Witnesses whose testimony they refused to believe in the case of my Lord Stafford, doth not a little surprize the thinking part of mankind. Now nothing can be more disservicable to his Majesty, or lessening to the honour of his Government, than to have his Authority abused to countenance a personal quarrel, and his Laws applied to revenge a private offence. And in another part as follows:—Nor can men persuade themselves to believe, but that the Imprisonment of my Lord Shaftsbury is built upon something which will not abide the Test, when they consider the way and method according to which he hath been all along treated. Before either Coleman or the Jesuits were sent to prison, they were allowed both to know and see the persons who had deposed against them. And it is generally believed, that every Englishman may demand it as his right. And therefore, the refusing it to my Lord Shaftsbury, does seem to intimate either that the Witnesses are not of a credit sufficient to support the confinement of so great a Peer, or else that it was not convenient to trust their carriage in this matter, as well as the general course of their lives, to an early and exact scrutiny. But as if this were not enough to create a suspition of some undue and indirect dealing in this affair, the refusing to administer an oath to those that were ready to swear to Indictments of Subornation against the Witnesses, doth exceedingly heighten all men's jealousies. For not to debate about the legality or illegality of this procedure, being obliged till this business do either before this or a higher judicature come under a review, to acquiesce silently in the Judgement of the Court; I shall only say: That as it is the first president of this kind, so the reducing it into common practice, would prove a general obstruction of the justice of the Law. And to make the receiving of Indictments depend upon the pleasure of the Attorney General were to settle on him a more Arbitrary Power than the Laws of England have placed in the King himself. And in another part as follows:—And we are the more inclined to believe this whole Conspiracy wherein the Earl of Shaftsbury and other Protestants are said to be engaged against the King and the Government, is only a malicious piece of revenge upon the zealous patriots of our Religion; by considering that Justice Warcup, and Mr. David Fitzgerald, are employed to conduct and manage the detection and discovery of it.[237]
A copy of the pamphlet is preserved in the British Museum Library. It is in quarto and contains 37 pages.
287.
A Satire, 1680.
This is a set of verses satirizing the Lord Chief Justice Scroggs, apparently very similar to those printed on [p. 216], for which Jane Curtis was prosecuted.
For publishing them a prosecution was instituted against John Howe, of the parish of St. Michael, Cornhill, bookseller.
The information charges that the defendant, contriving and maliciously intending to bring into hatred and contempt Sir William Scroggs, Lord Chief Justice, in those things which touch him and his judicial office and the King's authority, did, on the twenty-fourth day of May, in the thirty-second year of the reign of King Charles the Second, within the parish of St. Michael, Cornhill aforesaid, get into his hands a certain false, malicious, infamous, scandalous, and odious libel intituled A Satire, in which libel is contained among other things as follows:—The Judge is a base butcher's sonne (meaning the Lord Chief Justice.) Most sly of nocent blood. But for ten thousand pound has done The Pope a deal of good. 'Twas he that villaine Wakeman cleared, Who was to have poysened the King, As plaine to all but twelve appeared, For which he deserves to swing. (meaning again the Lord Chief Justice.) And that the said John Howe, knowing the aforesaid libel to be a scandalous and infamous libel, did on the said twenty-fourth day of May, publish and expose to sale the same libel, to the great scandal and contempt of the said Lord Chief Justice and the King's authority.[238]
There was also a prosecution against one Enoch Procer for publishing the same.[239]
288.