The clause contained in an act of the thirteenth of the queen, was a novelty; that the species of treason there enumerated must be proved by two witnesses, confronted with the criminal.

But Mary was not tried upon that act; and the ministers and crown lawyers of this reign were always sure to refuse every indulgence beyond what the strict letter of the law, and the settled practice of the courts of justice, required of them.

Not to mention, that these secretaries were not probably at Fotheringay Castle during the time of the trial, and could not, upon Mary's demand, be produced before the commissioners.[*] * Queen Elizabeth was willing to have allowed Curle and Nau to be produced in the trial, and writes to that purpose to Burleigh and Walsingham, in her letter of the seventh of October, in Forbes's MS collections.

She only says, that she thinks it needless, though she was willing to agree to it.
The not confronting of the witnesses was not the result of design, but the practice of the age.
There passed two incidents in this trial which may be worth observing.

A letter between Mary and Babington was read, in which mention was made of the earl of Arundel and his brothers: on hearing their names, she broke into a sigh.