The point was referred to the commissioners, some of whom attended the court of the Hague in person, while others sent written opinions.  All agreed that the criminal had committed high-treason because otherwise his property would not have been confiscated.

A more wonderful example of the argument in a circle was never heard of.  Moreover it is difficult to understand by what right the high commission, which had been dissolved a year before, after having completed its work, could be deemed competent to emit afterwards a judicial decision.  But the fact is curious as giving one more proof of the irregular, unphilosophical, and inequitable nature of these famous proceedings.

CHAPTER XXII.

   Grotius urged to ask Forgiveness—­Grotius shows great Weakness—­
   Hoogerbeets and Grotius imprisoned for Life—­Grotius confined at
   Loevestein—­Grotius’ early Attainments—­Grotius’ Deportment in
   Prison—­Escape of Grotius—­Deventer’s Rage at Grotius’ Escape.

Two days after the execution of the Advocate, judgment was pronounced upon Gillis van Ledenberg.  It would have been difficult to try him, or to extort a confession of high-treason from him by the rack or otherwise, as the unfortunate gentleman had been dead for more than seven months.

Not often has a court of justice pronounced a man, without trial, to be guilty of a capital offence.  Not often has a dead man been condemned and executed.  But this was the lot of Secretary Ledenberg.  He was sentenced to be hanged, his property declared confiscated.

His unburied corpse, reduced to the condition of a mummy, was brought out of its lurking-place, thrust into a coffin, dragged on a hurdle to the Golgotha outside the Hague, on the road to Ryswyk, and there hung on a gibbet in company of the bodies of other malefactors swinging there in chains.

His prudent scheme to save his property for his children by committing suicide in prison was thus thwarted.

The reading of the sentence of Ledenberg, as had been previously the case with that of Barneveld, had been heard by Grotius through the open window of his prison, as he lay on his bed.  The scaffold on which the Advocate had suffered was left standing, three executioners were still in the town, and there was every reason for both Grotius and Hoogerbeets to expect a similar doom.  Great efforts were made to induce the friends of the distinguished prisoners to sue for their pardon.  But even as in the case of the Barneveld family these attempts were fruitless.  The austere stoicism both on the part of the sufferers and their relatives excites something like wonder.

Three of the judges went in person to the prison chamber of Hoogerbeets, urging him to ask forgiveness himself or to allow his friends to demand it for him.

“If my wife and children do ask,” he said, “I will protest against it.  I need no pardon.  Let justice take its course.  Think not, gentlemen, that I mean by asking for pardon to justify your proceedings.”