ke of York. This, among many other
proofs, evinces that she was ignorant of the escape of that prince,
which is impossible had it been real. (10.) The total silence with
regard to the persons who aided him in his escape, as also with regard
to the place of his abode during more than eight years, is a sufficient
proof of the imposture. (11.) Perkin's own account of his escape is
incredible and absurd. He said, that murderers were employed by his
uncle to kill him and his brother; they perpetrated the crime against
his brother, but took compassion on him, and allowed him to escape. This
account is contained in all the historians of that age. (12.) Perkin
himself made a full confession of his imposture no less than three
times; once when he surrendered himself prisoner, a second time when he
was set in the stocks at Cheapside and Westminster, and a third time,
which carries undoubted evidence, at the foot of the gibbet on which
he was hanged. Not the least surmise that the confession had ever been
procured by torture; and surely the last time he had nothing further
to fear. (13.) Had not Henry been assured that Perkin was a ridiculous
impostor, disavowed by the whole nation, he never would have allowed him
to live an hour after he came into his power, much less would he have
twice pardoned him. His treatment of the innocent earl of Warwick, who,
in reality, had no title to the crown, is a sufficient confirmation of
this reasoning. (14.) We know with certainty whence the whole imposture
came, namely, from the intrigues of the duchess of Burgundy. She had
before acknowledged and supported Lambert Simnel, an avowed imposter.
It is remarkable that Mr. Carte, in order to preserve the weight of
the duchess's testimony in favor of Perkin, suppresses entirely this
material fact: a strong effect of party prejudices, and this author's
desire of blackening Henry VII., whose hereditary title to the crown was
defective. (15.) There never was, at that time, any evidence or shadow
of evidence produced of Perkin's identity with Richard Plantagenet.
Richard had disappeared when near nine years of age, and Perkin did not
appear till he was a man. Could any one from his aspect pretend then to
be sure of the identity? He had got some stories concerning Richard's
childhood, and the court of England; but all that it was necessary for
a boy of nine to remark or remember, was easily suggested to him by the
duchess of Burgundy, or Frion, Henry's sec