What was the Gunpowder Plot? The Traditional Story Tested by Original Evidence. Gerard John
Чтение книги онлайн.
Читать онлайн книгу What was the Gunpowder Plot? The Traditional Story Tested by Original Evidence - Gerard John страница 18
163
November 23rd, 1605.
164
165
Hugh F. Martyndale,
166
167
H.F. Martyndale,
168
Letter to the Ambassadors,
169
170
Sir R. Naunton,
171
Blount to Parsons (Stonyhurst MSS.),
172
Such letters are found amongst the State Papers.
173
The amount, it would seem, cannot have been less than this. A barrel of gunpowder, containing four firkins, weighed 400 lb., and had the casks in the cellar all been barrels, in the strict sense of the word, the amount would therefore have exceeded six tons. Some of these casks, we are told, were small, but some were hogsheads. The twenty barrels first laid in are described as "whole barrels." (Faukes, January 20th, 1605-6.)
174
An interesting illustration of this point is furnished by a strange piece of evidence furnished by W. Andrew, servant to Sir E. Digby. Sir Everard's office was to organize the rising in the Midlands, after the catastrophe, but he apparently forgot to supply himself with powder till the very eve of the appointed day. Andrew averred that on the night of November 4th, his master secretly asked him to procure some powder in the neighbouring town, whereupon he asked, "How much? A pound, or half a pound?" Sir Everard said 200 or 300 lb. Deponent purchased one pound. (Tanner MSS. lxxv. f. 205 b.)
One Matthew Batty mentioned Lord Monteagle as having bought gunpowder. (
In the same collection is a copy of some notes by Sir E. Coke (f. 185 b), in which the price of the powder discovered is put down as £200,
175
Gunpowder was measured by the
176
The position and character of the "cellar" admit of no doubt, as appears from the testimony of Smith's
Seeing, however, that the powder stood above ground, within a most substantial building, and could be reached by the rain only if this should first flood the Chamber of the Peers, it does not seem as if the idea of such a danger should have suggested itself.
Another interesting point in connection with the "cellar" is that the House of Lords having subsequently been removed to the Court of Requests, and afterwards to the Painted Chamber, "Guy Faukes' Cellar" on each occasion accompanied the migration. From Leigh's
177
Afterwards the Electress Palatine.
178
Gardiner,
179
Faukes, November 17th, 1605.
180
Harry Morgan,
181
T. Winter, November 23rd and 25th, 1605. As the information about Prince Henry was alleged to have been communicated by Lord Monteagle, the passage has been mutilated in the published version to conceal this circumstance.
182
Faukes, November 5th, 1605.
183
Sir E. Digby, Barlow's
184
Faukes, November 17th, 1605.
185
Digby,
186
187
There is also an allusion to the same in the confession of Keyes, November 30th, 1605; but this document also is of a highly suspicious character. Of the seven miners, none but these three were taken alive; Catesby, Percy, and the two Wrights being killed in the field. Strangely enough, though Keyes may be cited as a witness on this subject, on which his evidence is of such singular importance, the government, for some purpose of its own, tampered with the confession of Faukes wherein he is mentioned as one of the excavators, substituting Robert Winter's name for his, and placing Keyes amongst those "that wrought not in the myne." See Jardine's remarks on this point,
188
His detailed notes and plans are given in