historian Belling, and Leighton, the great archbishop's brother. The
second was the Protestant plot against the Catholics, especially the
Duke of York. The indignation against the real plot, that of Dover,
was essentially political.

In February 1675 the opposition proposed to James to restore his
offices if he would abandon Lewis. When the imperial ambassador, in
July 1677, complained of the No Popery cry, they replied that there
was no question of religion, but of liberty. In the case of Oates and
his comrades, the political motive faded into insignificance beside
the religious. At first the evidence was unsubstantial. Oates was an
ignorant man, and he obtained credit only by the excitement and
distrust caused by the discovery of the premeditated coup d'etat.
Godfrey, the magistrate who conducted the inquiry, warned James that
the secretary of the Duchess of York, was implicated. His name was
Coleman, and he had time to destroy his papers. Some of them were
seized. They spoke of a great blow which was being prepared against
the Protestants. It appeared also that he was in the pay of Lewis,
and had solicited his confessor, Pere La Chaise, for a sum of
L300,000 in order to get rid of parliament. It was argued that if
such things were found in the papers he had not burnt, there must have
been worse still in those which had perished. It showed that the
scheme of Dover was still pursued, was still a danger. At that moment
the magistrate who sent the warning disappeared. After some days his
dead body was found at the foot of Green Berry Hill, now Primrose
Hill; and one of the most extraordinary coincidences, so interesting
in the study of historical criticism, is the fact that the men hanged
for the murder were named Green, Berry, and Hill. It was of course
suspected that Godfrey had perished because he knew too much.