Lisle, who had been one of the judges of Charles the First, and who, during the Protectorate of Cromwell, had been Lord President of the High Court of Justice. She therefore started with a prejudice against her. She was charged with having, after the battle of Sedgemoor, harboured in her house one John Hicks, a nonconformist minister, who had been in arms with the Duke of Monmouth. The indictment stated that, "well knowing one John Hicks of Keinsham, in the county of Somerset, clerk, to be a false traitor and traitorously to have conspired and imagined the death and destruction of . . . . the king," she "secretly, wickedly, and traitorously" did "entertain, conceal, comfort, uphold and maintain" the said John Hicks in her dwelling-house, and "maliciously and traitorously" gave meat and drink to John Hicks. She had, as a matter of fact, admitted him into her house; but in her defence she said that she thought that he was merely a nonconformist minister, who had broken the law against preaching. It was never proved that she knew that he had been in arms with Monmouth, and her conviction was obtained in defiance of all the rules of English justice.

The trial took place at Winchester on 27th August, 1685, before Lord Chief Justice Jeffreys and several other judges. As Lady Lisle, or Mrs. Lisle, as she is variously described during the trial, was old and very deaf, one Matthew Browne was told off to stand near her and tell her what passed in the Court. Polloxfen, a barrister who was much thought of by the Presbyterians, was the leading counsel for the Crown, and opened the case. After he had finished, Lady Lisle interposed and said that she abhorred the rebellion as much as any woman in the world. Jeffreys, however, stopped her and told her that she could not speak at that stage of the trial. He explained to her the course of the proceedings, and concluded with an allocution which, in view of the fact that he had clearly determined to convict her, was base and hypocritical to a degree.

"It is absolutely requisite," he said, "that the usual forms and methods of law be inviolably observed, and be sure it does the prisoner no injury that the law is kept so strictly to; and we have that charity, as well as justice, that it becomes and is not below all Courts to have for persons in your condition; and we are obliged to take care that you suffer no detriment or any injury by any illegal or irregular proceedings. For though we sit here as judges over you by authority from the king, yet we are accountable, not only to him, but to the King of kings, the great judge of Heaven and earth; and therefore are obliged, both by our oaths and upon our consciences, to do you justice, and by the grace of God we shall do it, you may depend upon it. And as to what you say concerning yourself, I pray God with all my heart you may be innocent."

The first witness who was called was one Pope. He said that he had been taken prisoner by the rebels, and that Hicks came to him and offered to speak to "the King" for him, expressing surprise that Pope, being a Protestant, should serve a Popish prince. "The King" was, of course, the Duke of Monmouth, who signed himself during the campaign "James Rex." The next witness, Fitzherbert, corroborated Pope, saying that he had seen Hicks in the Duke's army, and that he had discoursed with Pope nearly an hour, disparaging the government and James the Second and extolling the Duke of Monmouth. The third witness, Taylor, also corroborated Pope.

The next witness was James Dunne, whose evidence was the most important in the case. Polloxfen told the Lord Chief Justice that he was a very unwilling witness, and asked Jeffreys to examine him himself. The judge thereupon warned Dunne in a long allocution to tell the truth, reminding him that the "God of Heaven may justly strike

thee into eternal flames, and make thee drop into the bottomless lake of fire and brimstone, if you offer to deviate the least from the truth, and nothing but the truth." Then Jeffreys examined him, or rather put him through a minute and severe cross-examination. Dunne was clearly trying to tell as little as he could, and fenced with the questions with considerable astuteness. But Jeffreys handled him with extraordinary skill, and it is impossible not to admire the ability with which Jeffreys elicited his evidence.

Dunne said that on Friday, 24th July, 1685, a messenger came to him and asked him to go to Lady Lisle's house, Moyle's Court, on behalf of one Hicks, and ask her if she would entertain Hicks. Dunne lived in the parish of Warminster, about twenty-six miles away from Moyle's Court, and set out on the next day, Saturday. When he came to Salisbury Plain he was at a loss how to proceed further, and he accosted one Barter, who agreed to show him the way. When Dunne finally reached Moyle's Court, he had an interview with Lady Lisle, who said that Hicks might come on the following Tuesday. Before parting, Dunne arranged with Barter that he should meet him again on Tuesday, on Salisbury Plain, to act as a guide a second time. Barter had his suspicions of Dunne and his errand, and on the following Monday went to a local justice of the peace, Colonel Penruddock, who agreed with Barter to go to Salisbury Plain on Tuesday, in order to arrest Dunne and his friends. On Tuesday the messenger who had originally come to Dunne, accompanied by Hicks and by one Nelthorpe, who had also been in arms for Monmouth, came to Dunne's house, and they all departed together for Moyle's Court. Barter met them as arranged on Salisbury Plain, but for some reason or other Col. Penruddock was not there to intercept them. Barter accompanied Hicks and Nelthorpe till they came to a point about eight miles from Lady Lisle's house. Here they discharged him, and got one

Fane to guide them for another seven miles, and when they were about a mile from Moyle's Court, they discharged Fane also. Dunne stated that when they arrived at Moyle's Court he saw Hicks and Nelthorpe no more, but later in the case he admitted that he had supper with them in the presence of Lady Lisle. Such was the story told by Dunne. Next morning, Wednesday, Colonel Penruddock came to the house with the necessary assistance, and arrested Dunne, Hicks, and Nelthorpe.

In the course of Dunne's evidence there were frequent adjurations on the part of Jeffreys to tell the truth. "I only bid you have a care," he says. "Truth never wants a subterfuge, it always loves to appear naked, it needs no enamel, nor any covering; but lying and snivelling and canting and Hicksing always appear in masquerade. `Come, go on with your evidence." Jeffreys pressed Dunne unsparingly, and followed the twistings and turnings of the witness with merciless tenacity. From time to time he induced him to tell the truth by saying that he himself already knew it. "Look to it that you be sure to tell me the truth, for I know it to a tittle, I can assure you that." Jeffreys had had an interview with Nelthorpe, who was then a prisoner in London, and undoubtedly he knew a great part of the truth. Here is a specimen of the way in which the chief justice wheedled out of Dunne the name of Fane, who had guided Hicks and him part of the way to Moyle's Court :—

L.C.J.-"Thou sayest well. Now must I know that man's name.

Dunne.-The man's name that I went to at Marlow, my lord?

L.C.J.-Yes, and look to it, you tell me right, for it may be I know the man already, and can tell at what end of the town the man lives, too.

D. My lord, I cannot tell his name presently.

L.C.J.-O! pray now, do not say so, you must tell us; indeed, you must think of his name a little.

D. My lord, if I can mind it I will.

L.C.J.-Prithee do.

D. His name, truly, my lord, I cannot rightly tell for the present.

L.C.J.-Prithee recollect thyself; indeed thou canst tell us if thou wilt.

D. My lord, I can go to the house again if I were at liberty.

L.C.J.-I believe it, and so could I; but really neither you nor I can be spared at present, therefore prithee do us the kindness now to tell us his name.

D. Truly, my lord, I cannot mind his name at present.

L.C.J.-Alack-a-day, we must needs have it! Come, refresh your memory a little.

D. My lord, I think his name was Fane.

L.C.J.-Thou sayest right; his name was Fane truly; thou seest I know something of the matter.

As the case went on Jeffreys became more abusive to Dunne. "Prithee, what trade art thou," said the judge. "My lord, I am a baker by trade," replied Dunne. "I assure thee, thy bread is very light weight, it will scarce pass the balance here," was the judge's comment. He addressed him as "you impudent rascal," and "you blockhead," and "thou vile wretch." He indulged freely in his favourite profane exclamation, "Jesus God!" "It is infinite mercy," he says, "that, for those falsehoods of thine, He does not immediately strike thee into Hell." Jeffreys dismissed Dunne with the remark, "Thou art a strange, prevaricating, shuffling, snivelling, lying rascal."