Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 10.djvu/640

620 REIGN OF ELIZABETH. [CH, 62. probably less than the truth. The letters proved ' how deeply he was overtaken with treason/ though it does not appear that they contained matter plain enough to ensure conviction on a trial, unless the presentation to the See by the Pope was ruled to be treasonable in itself. It was proved that he had been intimate at .Rome with the English refugees ; it was not shown that he had come to Ireland with a distinct insurrec- tionary purpose ; and like the Jesuits in England, he insisted loudly that his mission was purely religious. Loftus consulted the Dublin lawyers, who being Catho- lics themselves, ' found scruple to arraign him for that his treason was committed in foreign parts/ It was thought too that his ' clamorous denials ' in open court would produce a bad effect on the people. To allow him to escape would be a manifest failure of justice ; both Loftus and Wallop therefore considered that, with the Queen's approval, it would be well to execute the unfortunate wretch ' by martial law/ ' against which he could make- no just challenge, for that he had neither lands nor goods/ 1 Elizabeth took a month to consider, and then answered, ' that the man being so notorious and ill a subject as he appeared to be, the Lords Justices should proceed to his execution by or- dinary trial first ; ' but that ' if they found the effect of 1 Loftus and Wallop to Walsing- ham, March 7, 1584: MSS. Ireland. Forfeiture of property could only be enforced after a legal trial and con- viction. Martial law therefore was argument of Loftus that because a man possessed no property he was to be expected himself to acquiesce in being arbitrarily executed, could hardly have been used out of Ire- contined to the poor, but the inverse ] land.