“I know that there is an inclination to set an example in my person, to confront me with my best friends, to torture me, afterwards to convict me of contradictions and falsehoods as they say, and then to found an ignominious sentence upon points and trifles, for this it will be necessary to do in order to justify the arrest and imprisonment.  To escape all this I am going to God by the shortest road.  Against a dead man there can be pronounced no sentence of confiscation of property.  Done 17th September (o. s.) 1618.”

The family of the unhappy gentleman begged his body for decent burial.  The request was refused.  It was determined to keep the dead secretary above ground and in custody until he could be tried, and, if possible, convicted and punished.  It was to be seen whether it were so easy to baffle the power of the States-General, the Synod, and the Stadholder, and whether “going to God by the shortest road” was to save a culprit’s carcass from ignominy, and his property from confiscation.

The French ambassadors, who had been unwearied in their endeavour to restore harmony to the distracted Commonwealth before the arrest of the prisoners, now exerted themselves to throw the shield of their sovereign’s friendship around the illustrious statesman and his fellow-sufferers.

“It is with deepest sorrow,” said de Boississe, “that I have witnessed the late hateful commotions.  Especially from my heart I grieve for the arrest of the Seignior Barneveld, who with his discretion and wise administration for the past thirty years has so drawn the hearts of all neighbouring princes to himself, especially that of the King my master, that on taking up my pen to apprize him of these events I am gravely embarrassed, fearing to infringe on the great respect due to your Mightinesses or against the honour and merits of the Seignior Barneveld. . . .  My Lords, take heed to your situation, for a great discontent is smouldering among your citizens.  Until now, the Union has been the chief source of your strength.  And I now fear that the King my master, the adviser of your renowned Commonwealth, maybe offended that you have taken this resolution after consulting with others, and without communicating your intention to his ambassador . . . .  It is but a few days that an open edict was issued testifying to the fidelity of Barneveld, and can it be possible that within so short a time you have discovered that you have been deceived?  I summon you once more in the name of the King to lay aside all passion, to judge these affairs without partiality, and to inform me what I am to say to the King.  Such very conflicting accounts are given of these transactions that I must beg you to confide to me the secret of the affair.  The wisest in the land speak so strongly of these proceedings that it will be no wonder if the King my master should give me orders to take the Seignior Barneveld under his protection.  Should this prove to be the case, your Lordships will excuse my course . . .  I beg you earnestly in your wisdom not to give cause of offence to neighbouring princes, especially to my sovereign, who wishes from his heart to maintain your dignity and interests and to assure you of his friendship.”