in error, by Mr. Foley and Mr. Pollock. Bedloe really said that
Godfrey was lured into Somerset House Yard, not into 'some house
yard' (Foley), or 'into a house yard' (Pollock). Bedloe, so far,
agreed with Prance, but, in another set of notes on his deposition
(Longleat MSS., Coventry Papers, xi. 272-274, Pollock, 384-387), he
made Somerset House the scene of the murder. There are other
errors. Mr. Pollock and Mr. Foley make Bedloe accuse Father Eveley,
S.J., in whom I naturally recognised Father Evers or Every, who was
then at Tixall in Staffordshire. The name in the MS. is 'Welch,'
not Eveley. The MS. was manifestly written not before September 12.
It does not appear that Bedloe, on November 7, knew the plot as
invented by Oates, on which compare Mr. Pollock, p. 110, who thinks
that 'it is quite possible that Charles II. deceived him,' Bishop
Burnet, 'intentionally,' on this head (Burnet, ii. 745-746, 1725).
By printing 'he acquainted' instead of 'he acquainteth the Lords,'
in the British Museum MS., and by taking the document, apparently,
to be of November 7, Mr. Pollock has been led to an incorrect
conclusion. I am obliged to Father Gerard, S.J., for a correct
transcript of the British Museum MS.; see also Note iii., 'The
Jesuit Murderers,' at the end of this chapter, and Father Gerard's
The Popish Plot and its Latest Historian (Longman's, 1903).

Bedloe here asserts distinctly that one accomplice was an official
of the Queen's chapel, in her residence, Somerset House: a kind of
verger, in a purple gown. This is highly important, for the man
whom he later pretended to recognise as this accomplice was not a
'waiter,' did not 'wear a purple gown;' and, by his own account,
'was not in the chapel once a month.' Bedloe's recognition
of him, therefore, was worthless. He said that Godfrey was
smothered with a pillow, or two pillows, in a room in Somerset