Page:Galileo Galilei and the Roman Curia (IA cu31924012301754).pdf/293

Rh a short final examination had to take place outside the torture chamber, at which the accused was told that he had better confess, or recourse will be had to torture. (This took place precisely according to the rules of the Holy Office at Galileo's trial at the examination on 21st June.) If the accused persisted, and if in a special Congregation for this case the necessity of recourse to torture had previously been agreed upon (this must have taken place in the Congregation of 16th June), the judge had to order the removal of the accused to the torture chamber by a special formal decree, as follows:—"Tunc D.D. sedentes visa pertinacia et obstinatione ipsius constitati, visoque et mature considerato toto tenore processus  decreverunt, ipsum constituum esse torquendum tormento funis pro veritate habendo  Et ideo mandaverunt ipsum constitutum duci ad locum tormentorum."

Second, a notary of the Inquisition had to be present in the torture chamber, and the judges had to see "that he noted down not only all the answers of the accused, but all his expressions and movements, every word that he uttered on the rack, even every sigh, cry, and groan.

Third, within twenty-four hours after his release from the torture chamber, the accused had to ratify all his utterances under the torments of the rack, or under threat of them, in the usual court. Otherwise the whole proceeding was null and void.

Of all these documents, which must have existed if actual torture had been employed, or even if Galileo had been taken into the torture chamber, there is not a trace in the Acts of the trial in the Vatican. Dr. Wohlwill and Dr.