The opinion of the meeting was conveyed to William by his ministers; and he consented, though not without reluctance, to see the prisoner.  Fenwick was brought into the royal closet at Kensington.  A few of the great officers of state and the Crown lawyers were present.  “Your papers, Sir John,” said the King, “are altogether unsatisfactory.  Instead of giving me an account of the plots formed by you and your accomplices, plots of which all the details must be exactly known to you, you tell me stories, without authority, without date, without place, about noblemen and gentlemen with whom you do not pretend to have had any intercourse.  In short your confession appears to be a contrivance intended to screen those who are really engaged in designs against me, and to make me suspect and discard those in whom I have good reason to place confidence.  If you look for any favour from me, give me, this moment and on this spot, a full and straightforward account of what you know of your own knowledge.”  Fenwick said that he was taken by surprise, and asked for time.  “No, Sir,” said the King.  “For what purpose can you want time?  You may indeed want time if you mean to draw up another paper like this.  But what I require is a plain narrative of what you have yourself done and seen; and such a narrative you can give, if you will, without pen and ink.”  Then Fenwick positively refused to say any thing.  “Be it so,” said William.  “I will neither hear you nor hear from you any more."752 Fenwick was carried back to his prison.  He had at this audience shown a boldness and determination which surprised those who had observed his demeanour.  He had, ever since he had been in confinement, appeared to be anxious and dejected; yet now, at the very crisis of his fate, he had braved the displeasure of the Prince whose clemency he had, a short time before, submissively implored.  In a very few hours the mystery was explained.  Just before he had been summoned to Kensington, he had received from his wife intelligence that his life was in no danger, that there was only one witness against him, that she and her friends had succeeded in corrupting Goodman.753

Goodman had been allowed a liberty which was afterwards, with some reason, made matter of charge against the government.  For his testimony was most important; his character was notoriously bad; the attempts which had been made to seduce Porter proved that, if money could save Fenwick’s life, money would not be spared; and Goodman had not, like Porter, been instrumental in sending Jacobites to the gallows, and therefore was not, like Porter, bound to the cause of William by an indissoluble tie.  The families of the imprisoned conspirators employed the agency of a cunning and daring adventurer named O’Brien.  This man knew Goodman well.  Indeed they had belonged to the same gang of highwaymen.  They met at the Dog in Drury Lane, a tavern which was frequented by lawless and desperate men.  O’Brien was accompanied