Page:A history of the gunpowder plot-The conspiracy and its agents (1904).djvu/260

230 relating to the Plot. The version at Hatfield is the original, written by Winter himself. That in the Record Office is a copy made by Lord Salisbury's secretary, Monck, and corresponds very nearly with that published in the 'King's Book.' Between the three exists no really material difference except in matters of punctuation. The Hatfield copy is, of course, the only one signed by Winter himself. In the copy published in the 'King's Book' the marginal note, referred to above, is incorporated in the text. I have mainly followed, in the above transcription, the Record Office version, although accepting occasionally the punctuation and textual arrangement adopted in the 'King's Book.'

The holograph text at Hatfield is, beyond doubt, in Winter's handwriting, and even if the signature, 'Thomas Winter,' attached to it, should ever be proved to be a forgery, as is quite possible, it would not impugn in the least the veracity of the contents of the document. No forger could have known about many of the incidents described by Winter. No agent of the Government could have invented, or hit upon, the meeting in September (1605) at Bath. No other person but Winter himself could have related the true story of his adventures in the Low Countries. Such suggestions of error that the writer was chronologically wrong in stating in what sequence the various conspirators joined the Plot are worthless. In a matter about which