nn
n
n
n
n Miles Prance was a Catholic goldsmith and maker ofnreligious emblems to Catherine of Braganza, Queen consort of King Charles II.nThe self-styled ‘Captain’ William Bedloe, an adventurer who placed himself at thenheart of Titus Oates’s Popish Plot, spotted Prance either in a corridor or innan eating-house and identified him as one of the men present when he had, henclaimed, seen the body of Sir Edmund Berry Godfrey in a darkened room atnSomerset House. Prance was arrested and left in a freezing cell, laden withnchains, at Newgate gaol and was coerced into confessing that he had beenninvolved in Godfrey’s murder.
n
n
n
 |
| The Rack |
n
n
n
nHe recanted his confession and was returned tonNewgate, where he was certainly tortured and was probably threatened with thenrack, which had been illegal in England for over fifty years, and made anothernconfession, which substantiated the story, in parts, given by Bedloe.
n
n
n
 |
| Prance – A Narrative of the Murther of Sir Godfrey |
n
n
n
nOn thenevidence given by Bedloe and Prance three men, Green, Berry and Hill, were foundnguilty and hanged for the murder of Godfrey, which added credence to Oates’snallegations that the English Catholics, and in particular the Jesuits, werenplanning to assassinate the King and aid an invasion from the continent,noverthrowing the government and re-establishing a Catholic monarchy, possiblynwith James, Duke of York and the King’s Catholic brother, as its figurehead.nOates’s claims had been threatening to falter and the Godfrey case regeneratedninterest and provided credibility for them, adding impetus and creating annanti-Catholic paranoia in England.
n
n
n
 |
| Miles Prance – A True Narrative – 1679 |
n
n
n
nPrance’s version of events A TruenNarrative and Discovery appeared in 1679, and reveals glaring discrepanciesnbetwen his and Bedloe’s account, whilst also containing numerous examples ofncrimes, plots and indiscretions committed by English Catholics and Jesuitnpriests. Nevertheless, Prance was retained, provided further evidence in trialsninitiated by Oates, and received ‘special’ payments by the secret service.nPrance also proved that Sir Roger L’Estrange, Oates’s most vociferous andndangerous critic, was secretly a Catholic, thereby removing the plot’s mostnformidable opponent.
n
n
n
 |
| The Answer of Miles Prance – 1684 |
n
n
n
nSeveral years after the plot had been proven to be theninvention of Oates, charges of perjury were brought against Prance and in 1686,nhe was found guilty and sentenced to a fine of £100, to be thrice pilloried andnwhipped through the streets from Newgate to Tyburn, although this last part wasnremitted at the intervention of the King. This is odd, as the remaining sentencenwas remarkably light and it is likely that a deal had been struck beforehand.nPrance admitted his perjury, claiming that he had been forced into it throughn‘fear and cowardice’.
nnn
n
n
n
n
 |
| Miles Prance |
n
n
n
nAnd then the story gets really weird. In 1689,nfollowing the Glorious Revolution, Miles Prance attempted to escape fromnEngland by boarding a hoy Asia, bound from Gravesend to Dunkirk. This,nin itself, was not unusual, as many Catholics followed the deposed King Jamesninto continental exile. Prance was aboard one of the last boats rowingnpassengers out to the Asia when the officers of the harbour seized thenboat and arrested those already aboard the ship. What is unusual is Prance’sntravelling partner – Father John Warner, the late provincial of the Jesuits innEngland, former rector of St Orme’s and once confessor to King James II, makingnhim the most important Jesuit in England.
n
n
n
n
n
nWhy was he, of all people, travellingnwith Prance? He obviously knew him, and knew what he had done. He knew that hisnperjury had sentenced two innocent Catholics to death. He knew that his TruenNarrative and Discovery had exposed numerous other Jesuits to immensendanger. He presumably appreciated that Prance might reveal his identity at anyntime, when detection would lead to imprisonment and maybe even death.
n
n
n
nAnd whynwas Prance fleeing England? It is true that his confession that his accusationsnagainst the Catholics were false would not endear him to the newnadministration, but he had only to claim that they had been extorted undernduress and retract them, to then live in relative safety. Why on earth was hengoing to France, where there were Catholics enough to resent his former lies?nAnd why was he, of all people, travelling with Father Warner?
n
n
n
 |
| A Remonstrance of Piety – 1683 |
n
n
n
n
n
nThere can only benone logical explanation. Miles Prance had been a Jesuit double agent all along.nThis explains the lenient, almost trifling, sentence for his perjury. The Kingnand Father Warner knew his true identity. Warner and Prance escaped fromncaptivity and separated. Warner took a ship from Maidstone using a falsenpassport, and made it to France. Prance was retaken and the Mayor of Gravesendnsent him to the House of Lords for questioning, but no proceedings were takennagainst him and it seems likely that he eventually lived out the rest of hisndays abroad, most probably in France.
nnn
n
nnn
