improbable 'wealth of mental equipment,' 'phenomenal powers of
memory, imagination, and coolness,' if the tale was false.**
Therefore Prance's story of the murder was true, except in the
details as to the men whom he accused. On December 24, he was taken
to the places which he described (certainly lying in his tale), and
preserved consistency, though, after long search, he could not find
one of the rooms in which he said that the corpse was laid.***

*Pollock,p.166.
**Ibid. p. 146.
***Lords' Journals, xii. pp. 436-438.

As Prance, by Mr. Pollock's theory, was one of the most acute of
Jesuit agents, and as he had all the materials, and all the
knowledge necessary for a confession, he had, obviously, no
difficulty in making up his evidence. Even by Mr. Pollock's
showing, he was cool and intellectual enough; for, on that showing,
he adapted into his narrative, very subtly, circumstances which were
entirely false. If, as Mr. Pollock holds, Prance was astute enough
to make a consistent patchwork of fact and lie, how can it be argued
that, with the information at his command, he could not invent a
complete fiction?

Again, Prance, by misstating dates wildly, hoped, says Mr. Pollock,
to escape as a mere liar.* But, when Prance varied in almost every
detail of time, place, motive, and person from Bedloe, Mr. Pollock
does not see that his own explanation holds for the variations. If
Prance wished to escape as a babbling liar, he could not do better
than contradict Bedloe. He DID, but the Protestant conscience
swallowed the contradictions. But again, if Prance did not know the