1 Percy is undoubtedly very singular, and the more so when we learn something of the history and character of the man. Till within some three years previously 1 he had been a Protestant, and, moreover, unusually wild and dissolute. After his conversion, he acquired the character of a zealous, if turbulent, Catholic, and is so described, not only by Father Gerard and Father Greenway, but by himself. In a letter written so late as November 2nd, 1605,2 he represents that he has to leave Yorkshire, being threatened by the Archbishop with arrest, "as the chief pillar of papistry in that county." It unfortunately appears that all the time this zealous convert was a bigamist, having one wife living in the capital and another in the provinces. When his name was published in connection with the Plot, the magistrates of London arrested the one, and those of Warwickshire the other, alike reporting to the secretary what they had done, as may be seen in the State Paper Office.3 Gravely suspicious as such a fact must appear in connection with one professing exceptional religious fervour, it by no means stands alone. Father Greenway, in describing the character of Percy, dwells much on his sensitiveness to the suspicion of having played false to his fellow Catholics in his dealings with King 1 "About the time of my Lord Essex his enterprise he became Catholic" (i.e. 1601). Father Gerard, Narrative, p. 58. 3 2 P. R. O. Gunpowder Plot Book, n. 4. Justice Grange, of St. Giles-in-the-Fields, to Salisbury, November 5th, 1605. Justices of Warwickshire, to the same, November 12th. • MS., f. 31-32. Hæc eft vera & prima origmalis editio Thoae Perci Os vultumg vides Thome tognomine Percy THOMAS PERCY. 1 James in Scotland, coupled with protestations of his determination to do something to show that he as well as they had been deceived by that monarch. We find evidence that as a fact some Catholics distrusted him, as in the examination of one Cary, who, being interrogated concerning the Powder Plot, protested that "Percy was no Papist but a Puritan." There is likewise in the king's own book a strange and obscure reference to Percy as the possible author of the letter to Monteagle, one of the chief grounds for suspecting him being "his backwardness in religion." It would moreover appear that he was not a man who always impressed those favourably who had to do with him, for Chamberlain reminds his friend Carleton that the latter had ever considered him "a subtle, flattering, dangerous knave." " We have seen something of the extraordinary manner in which Percy transacted the business of hiring the house and "cellar," wholly unlike what we should expect from one whose main object was to escape observation, and that he brought to bear the influence of sundry Protestant gentlemen, amongst them Dudley Carleton himself, in order to obtain the desired lease. 1 Tanner MSS., ut sup., f. 167. 2 P. R. O. Dom. James I., November 7th, 1605. 3 The case of Carleton is not without mystery. At the time of the discovery he was at Paris, as secretary to the English ambassador, but about the middle of the month was ordered home in hot haste and placed "in restraint." On February 28th, 1605-6, he wrote to his friend Chamberlain that he was airing himself on the Chilterns to get rid of the scent of powder, asking his correspondent to consult a patron as to his best means of promotion (Dom. James I. xviii. 125). Far from being injured by any suspicion that he might seem to have incurred, We know, moreover, that various unfortunate accidents prevented the history of these negotiations from ever being fully told. 1 Yet more remarkable is a piece of information supplied by Bishop Goodman, his authority being the eminent lawyer Sir Francis Moore, who, says he, “is beyond all exception." Moore, having occasion during the period when the Plot was in progress to be out on business late at night, and going homeward to the Middle Temple at two in the morning, "several times he met Mr. Percy coming out of the great statesman's house, and wondered what his business should be there." Such wonder was certainly not unnatural, and must be shared by us. That a man who was ostensibly the life and soul of a conspiracy directed against the king's chief minister, even more than against the sovereign himself, should resort for conference with his intended victim at an hour when he was most likely to escape observation, is assuredly not the least extraordinary feature in this strange and tangled tale. Not less suspicious is another circumstance. Immediately before the fatal Fifth of November, Percy had been away in the north, and he returned to London only on the evening of Saturday, the 2nd. Of this return, Cecil, writing a week later,2 made a great mystery, as though the traitor's movements had been of a most stealthy and secret character, and declared he subsequently rose rapidly in favour, was intrusted with most important diplomatic missions, and was finally created Viscount Dorchester. 1 Court of King James, i. 105. 2 To the ambassadors, November 9th. that the fact had been discovered from Faukes only with infinite difficulty, and after many denials. It happens, however, that amongst the State Papers is preserved a pass dated October 25th, issued by the Commissioners of the North, for Thomas Percy, posting to Court upon the king's especial service, and charging all mayors, sheriffs, and postmasters to provide him with three good horses all along the road.' It is manifestly absurd to speak of secrecy or stealth in connection with such a journey, or to pretend that the Chief Secretary of State could have any difficulty in tracing the movements of a man who travelled in this fashion; and protestations of ignorance serve only to show that to seem ignorant was thought desirable. Considerations like these, it will hardly be denied, countenance the notion that Percy was, in King James's own phrase, a tame duck employed to catch wild ones. Against such a supposition, however, a grave objection at once presents itself. Percy was amongst the very first victims of the enterprise, being one of the four who were killed at Holbeche when the conspirators were brought to bay. This, unquestionably, must at first sight appear to be fatal to the theory of his complicity, and the importance of such a fact should not be extenuated. At the same time, on further scrutiny, the argument which it supplies loses much of its force. It must, in the first place, be remembered, that according to the belief then current, it was no uncommon thing, as Lord Castlemaine expresses it' the game being secured, to hang the spaniel which caught 1 Dom. James I. xv. 106. 2 2 Catholique Apology, p. 415. |