d in increasing the popular ferment against
Barneveldt, Grotius and Hoogerbetz; in collecting evidence of the
designs and practices of which they were accused, and in framing the
legal proceedings against them in such a manner as was most likely both
to procure their conviction, and to persuade the public of their guilt.

We have mentioned that their confinement took place on the 20th of
August 1618, and that they were removed from the Hague, the original
place of their imprisonment, to the Castle of Louvestein. On the 19th
November, the States General, at the instigation of Prince Maurice,
nominated twenty-six commissioners for their trial. All the prisoners
objected both to the jurisdiction of the commissioners, and to that of
the States General; and asserted that the States of Holland were their
only competent judges. They observed, at the same time, that many of the
judges were notoriously prejudiced against the Arminians.

[Sidenote: Trial and Imprisonment of Grotius.]

The act of accusation contained many general charges, and many averments
of particular facts, supposed to substantiate them. It was alleged
against the prisoners, that they had disturbed the established religion
of the United Provinces; that, in direct contradiction of the articles
of union, they had asserted the right of each province to decide for
itself in matters of religion; that they had set up the authority and
interests of the States of Holland and West Friesland against those of
the States General; that they were the authors of the Insurrection at
Utrecht; had levied, in opposition to the orders of government, the
attendant soldiers; had raised jealousies between the Prince and several
of the Provincial States, and between these and the States General; and
that, by their habitual conduct, they had become public disturbers of
the tranquillity of the republic, and councillors and practisers of
schemes hostile to its welfare.

[Sidenote: CHAP. VII. 1618-1621.]

The Commissioners proceeded to the trial of Barneveldt. Uniformly
protesting against the competency of the tribunal, Barneveldt defended
himself with great firmness and ability. He controverted every article
of the accusation, and concluded his defence, by a long and pathetic
enumeration of the services, which he had rendered to the republic; and
of the numerous actions, by which he had shewn his attachment to Prince
William and Prince Maurice:--he proved that it had been principall