The first step of a Jesuit, or of any gentleman, about to commit a
deliberate deeply planned murder, is to secure an alibi. Le Fevre
did not, or, when questioned (on Mr. Pollock's theory) by Bedloe, he
would have put him off with his alibi. Again, 'a Jesuit,' 'the
Queen's confessor,' does not do his murders in the Queen's house:
no gentleman does. But, if Le Fevre did commit this solecism, he
would have told Bedloe a different story; if he confessed to him at
all. These things are elementary.

Prance's confession, as to the share of Hill, Berry, and Green in
the murder, was admittedly false. On one point he stumbled always:
'Were there no guards at the usual places at the time of the
carrying on this work?' he was asked by one of the Lords on December
24,1678. He mumbled, 'I did not take notice of any.'* He never, on
later occasions, could answer this question about the sentries.
Prance saw no sentries, and there is nowhere any evidence that the
sentries were ever asked whether they saw either Prance, Le Fevre,
or Godfrey, in Somerset House or the adjacent Somerset Yard, on
October 12. They were likely to know both the Queen's silversmith
and 'the Queen's confessor,' and Godfrey they may have known.
Prance and the sentries had, for each other, the secret of fern-
seed, they walked invisible. This, of itself, is fatal to Prance's
legend.

*Lords' Journals, xiii. p. 438.

No sooner had Prance confessed than he withdrew his confession. He
prayed to be taken before the King, knelt, and denied all. Next day
he did the same before the Council. He was restored to his pleasant
quarters in Newgate, and recanted his recantation. He again