The declaration against Count Horn; upon which, supported by invisible witnesses, he was condemned, was in the nature of a narrative.  It consisted in a rehearsal of circumstances, some true and some fictitious, with five inferences.  These five inferences amounted to five crimes—­high treason, rebellion, conspiracy, misprision of treason, and breach of trust.  The proof of these crimes was evolved, in a dim and misty manner, out of a purposely confused recital.  No events, however, were recapitulated which have not been described in the course of this history.  Setting out with a general statement, that the Admiral, the Prince of Orange, Count Egmont, and other lords had organized a plot to expel his Majesty from the Netherlands, and to divide the provinces among themselves; the declaration afterwards proceeded to particulars.  Ten of its sixty-three articles were occupied with the Cardinal Granvelle, who, by an absurd affectation, was never directly named, but called “a certain personage—­a principal personage—­a grand personage, of his Majesty’s state council.”  None of the offences committed against him were forgotten:  the 11th of March letter, the fool’s-cap, the livery, were reproduced in the most violent colors, and the cabal against the minister was quietly assumed to constitute treason against the monarch.

The Admiral, it was further charged, had advised and consented to the fusion of the finance and privy councils with that of state, a measure which was clearly treasonable.  He had, moreover, held interviews with the Prince of Orange, with Egmont, and other nobles, at Breda and at Hoogstraaten, at which meetings the confederacy and the petition had been engendered.  That petition had been the cause of all the evils which had swept the land.  “It had scandalously injured the King, by affirming that the inquisition was a tyranny to humanity, which was an infamous and unworthy proposition.”  The confederacy, with his knowledge and countenance, had enrolled 30,000 men.  He had done nothing, any more than Orange or Egmont, to prevent the presentation of the petition.  In the consultation at the state-council which ensued, both he and the Prince were for leaving Brussels at once, while Count Egmont expressed an intention of going to Aix to drink the waters.  Yet Count Egmont’s appearance (proceeded this indictment against another individual) exhibited not a single sign of sickness.  The Admiral had, moreover, drank the toast of “Vivent leg gueux” on various occasions, at the Culemberg House banquet, at the private table of the Prince of Orange, at a supper at the monastery of Saint Bernard’s, at a dinner given by Burgomaster Straalen.  He had sanctioned the treaties with the rebels at Duffel, by which he had clearly rendered himself guilty of high treason.  He had held an interview with Orange, Egmont, and Hoogstraaten, at Denremonde, for the treasonable purpose of arranging a levy of troops to prevent his Majesty’s entrance into the Netherlands.