** Rymer, vol. xi. p. 53.
In proportion as Henry advanced in years, his character became fully
known in the court, and was no longer ambiguous to either faction. Of
the most harmless, inoffensive, simple manners, but of the most slender
capacity, he was fitted, both by the softness of his temper and the
weakness of his understanding, to be perpetually governed by those who
surrounded him; and it was easy to foresee that his reign would prove a
perpetual minority. As he had now reached the twenty-third year of his
age, it was natural to think of choosing him a queen; and each party was
ambitious of having him receive one from their hand, as it was probable
that this circumstance would decide forever the victory between them.
The duke of Glocester proposed a daughter of the count of Armagnac; but
had not credit to effect his purpose. The cardinal and his friends had
cast their eye on Margaret of Anjou, daughter of Regnier, titular king
of Sicily, Naples, and Jerusalem, descended from the count of Anjou,
brother of Charles V., who had left these magnificent titles, but
without any real power or possessions, to his posterity. This princess
herself was the most accomplished of her age, both in body and mind;
and seemed to possess those qualities which would equally qualify her
to acquire the ascendant over Henry, and to supply all his defects
and weaknesses. Of a masculine, courageous spirit, of an enterprising
temper, endowed with solidity as well as vivacity of understanding, she
had not been able to conceal these great talents even in the privacy
of her father’s family; and it was reasonable to expect, that when
she should mount the throne, they would break out with still superior
lustre. The earl of Suffolk, therefore, in concert with his associates
of the English council, made proposals of marriage to Margaret, which
were accepted. But this nobleman, besides preoccupying the princess’s
favor by being the chief means of her advancement, endeavored to
ingratiate himself with her and her family, by very extraordinary
concessions: though Margaret brought no dowry with her, he ventured of
himself, without any direct authority from the council, but probably
with the approbation of the cardinal and the ruling members, to engage,
by a secret article, that the province of Maine, which was at that time
in the hands of the English, should be ceded to Charles of Anjou, her
uncle,[*] who was prime minister and favorite of the French king, and
who had already received from his master the grant of that province as
his appanage.
The treaty of marriage was ratified in England: Suffolk obtained first
the title of marquis, then that of duke; and even received the thanks
of parliament for his services in concluding it.[**] The princess fell
immediately into close connections with the cardinal and his party, the
dukes of Somerset, Suffolk, and Buckingham;[***] who, fortified by her
powerful patronage, resolved on the final ruin of the duke of Glocester.
* Grafton, p. 590.
** Cotton, p. 630.
*** Holingshed, p. 626.
{1447.} This generous prince, worsted in all court intrigues, for which
his temper was not suited, but possessing in a high degree the favor of
the public, had already received from his rivals a cruel mortification,
which he had hitherto borne without violating public peace, but which
it was impossible that a person of his spirit and humanity could ever
forgive. His duchess, the daughter of Reginald Lord Cobham, had been
accused of the crime of witchcraft; and it was pretended, that there was
found in her possession a waxen figure of the king, which she and her
associates, Sir Roger Bolingbroke, a priest, and one Margery Jordan, of
Eye, melted in a magical manner before a slow fire, with an intention
of making Henry’s force and vigor waste away by like insensible degrees.
The accusation was well calculated to affect the weak and credulous mind
of the king, and to gain belief in an ignorant age; and the duchess was
brought to trial with her confederates. The nature of this crime, so
opposite to all common sense, seems always to exempt the accusers from
observing the rules of common sense in their evidence: the prisoners
were pronounced guilty; the duchess was condemned to do public penance,
and to suffer perpetual imprisonment; the others were executed.[*] But
as these violent proceedings were ascribed solely to the malice of the
duke’s enemies, the people, contrary to their usual practice in such
marvellous trials, acquitted the unhappy sufferers; and increased their
esteem and affection towards a prince who was thus exposed, without
protection, to those mortal injuries.
These sentiments of the public made the cardinal of Winchester and his
party sensible that it was necessary to destroy a man whose popularity
might become dangerous, and whose resentment they had so much cause to
apprehend. In order to effect their purpose, a parliament was summoned
to meet, not at London, which was supposed to be too well affected to
the duke, but at St. Edmondsbury, where they expected that he would
lie entirely at their mercy. As soon as he appeared, he was accused of
treason, and thrown into prison. He was soon after found dead in his
bed;[**] and though it was pretended that his death was natural, and
though his body, which was exposed to public view, bore no marks of
outward violence, no one doubted but he had fallen a victim to the
vengeance of his enemies.
* Stowe, p. 381. Holingshed, p. 622. Grafton, p. 687.
** Grafton, p. 597.
An artifice, formerly practised in the case of Edward II., Richard II.,
and Thomas of Woodstock, duke of Glocester, could deceive nobody. The
reason of this assassination of the duke seems, not that the ruling
party apprehended his acquittal in parliament on account of his
innocence, which, in such times, was seldom much regarded, but that they
imagined his public trial and execution would have been more invidious
than his private murder which they pretended to deny. Some gentlemen of
his retinue were afterwards tried as accomplices in his treasons, and
were condemned to be hanged, drawn, and quartered, They were hanged and
cut down; but just as the executioner was proceeding to quarter them,
their pardon was produced, and they were recovered to life;[*] the most
barbarous kind of mercy that can possibly be imagined!
This prince is said to have received a better education than was
usual in his age, to have founded one of the first public libraries in
England, and to have been a great patron of learned men. Among other
advantages which he reaped from this turn of mind, it tended much to
cure him of credulity of which the following instance is given by Sir
Thomas More. There was a man who pretended that, though he was born
blind, he had recovered his sight by touching the shrine of St. Albans.
The duke, happening soon after to pass that way, questioned the man, and
seeming to doubt of his sight, asked him the colors of several cloaks,
worn by persons of his retinue. The man told them very readily. “You are
a knave,” cried the prince; “had you been born blind, you could not so
soon have learned to distinguish colors;” and immediately ordered him to
be set in the stocks as an impostor.[**]
* Fabian, Chron. anno 1447.
** Grafton, p. 597.
The cardinal of Winchester died six weeks after his nephew whose murder
was universally ascribed to him as well as to the duke of Suffolk, and
which, it is said, gave him more remorse in his last moments than could
naturally be expected from a man hardened, during the course of a long
life, in falsehood and in politics. What share the queen had in this
guilt is uncertain; her usual activity and spirit made the public
conclude, with some reason, that the duke’s enemies durst not have
ventured on such a deed without her privity. But there happened, soon
after, an event of which she and her favorite, the duke of Suffolk, bore
incontestably the whole odium.
That article of the marriage treaty by which the province of Maine was
to be ceded to Charles of Anjou, the queen’s unele, had probably been
hitherto kept secret; and during the lifetime of the duke of Glocester,
it might have been dangerous to venture on the execution of it. But as
the court of France strenuously insisted on performance, orders were
now despatched, under Henry’s hand, to Sir Francis Surienne, governor
of Mans, commanding him to surrender that place to Charles of Anjou.
Surienne, either questioning the authenticity of the order, or regarding
his government as his sole fortune, refused compliance; and it became
necessary for a French army, under the count of Dunois, to lay siege
to the city. The governor made as good a defence as his situation could
permit; but receiving no relief from Edmund, duke of Somerset, who was
at that time governor of Normandy, he was at last obliged to capitulate,
and to surrender not only Mans, but all the other fortresses of that
province, which was thus entirely alienated from the crown of England.
{1448.} The bad effects of this measure stopped not here. Surienne, at
the head of all his garrisons, amounting to two thousand five hundred
men, retired into Normandy, in expectation of being taken into pay, and
of being quartered in some towns of that province. But Somerset, who had
no means of subsisting such a multitude, and who was probably incensed
at Surienne’s disobedience, refused to admit him; and this adventurer,
not daring to commit depredations on the territories either of the
king of France or of England, marched into Brittany, seized the town
of Fougeres, repaired the fortifications of Pontorson and St. James de
Beuvron, and subsisted his troops by the ravages which he exercised on
that whole province.[*] The duke of Brittany complained of this violence
to the king of France, his liege lord: Charles remonstrated with the
duke of Somerset: that nobleman replied, that the injury was done
without his privity, and that he had no authority over Surienne and his
companions.[**] Though this answer ought to have appeared satisfactory
to Charles, who had often felt severely the licentious independent
spirit of such mercenary soldiers, he never would admit of the apology.
He still insisted that these plunderers should be recalled, and that
reparation should be made to the duke of Brittany for all the damages
which he had sustained: and in order to render an accommodation
absolutely impracticable, he made the estimation of damages amount to no
less a sum than one million six hundred thousand crowns. He was sensible
of the superiority which the present state of his affairs gave him over
England; and he determined to take advantage of it.
* Monstrelet, vol. iii. p. 6.
** Monstrelet vol. iii. p. 7. Holingshed, p. 629.
No sooner was the truce concluded between the two kingdoms, than Charles
employed himself, with great industry and judgment, in repairing those
numberless ills to which France, from the continuance of wars both
foreign and domestic, had so long been exposed. He restored the course
of public justice; he introduced order into the finances; he established
discipline in his troops; he repressed faction in his court; he revived
the languid state of agriculture and the arts; and, in the course of
a few years, he rendered his kingdom flourishing within itself, and
formidable to its neighbors. Meanwhile, affairs in England had taken
a very different turn. The court was divided into parties, which were
enraged against each other: the people were discontented with the
government: conquests in France, which were an object more of glory than
of interest, were overlooked amidst domestic incidents, which engrossed
the attention of all men: the governor of Normandy, ill supplied with
money, was obliged to dismiss the greater part of his troops, and to
allow the fortifications of the towns and castles to become ruinous;
and the nobility and people of that province had, during the late open
communication with France, enjoyed frequent opportunities of renewing
connections with their ancient master, and of concerting the means for
expelling the English. The occasion, therefore, seemed favorable to
Charles for breaking the truce.
{1449.} Normandy was at once invaded by four powerful armies: one
commanded by the king himself; a second by the duke of Brittany; a third
by the duke of Alençon; and a fourth by the count of Dunois. The places
opened their gates almost as soon as the French appeared before them;
Verneuil, Nogent, Chateau Gaillard, Ponteau de Mer, Gisors, Mante,
Vernon, Argentan Lisieux, Fecamp, Coutances, Belesme, Pont de l’Arche,
fell in an instant into the hands of the enemy. The duke of Somerset,
so far from having an army which could take the field and relieve these
places, was not able to supply them with the necessary garrisons and
provisions. He retired, with the few troops of which he was master, into
Rouen; and thought it sufficient, if, till the arrival of succors
from England, he could save that capital from the general fate of the
province. The king of France, at the head of a formidable army, fifty
thousand strong, presented himself before the gates: the dangerous
example of revolt had infected the inhabitants; and they called aloud
for a capitulation. Somerset, unable to resist at once both the enemies
within one from without, retired with his garrison into the palace and
castle; which, being places not tenable he was obliged to surrender:
he purchased a retreat to Harfleur by the payment of fifty-six thousand
crowns, by engaging to surrender Arques, Tancarville, Caudebec,
Honfleur, and other places in the higher Normandy, and by delivering.
hostages for the performance of articles.[*]
{1450.} The governor of Honfleur refused to obey his orders; upon
which the earl of Shrewsbury, who was one of the hostages, was detained
prisoner; and the English were thus deprived of the only general capable
of recovering them from their present distressed; situation. Harfleur
made a better defence under Sir Thomas Curson, the governor; but was
finally obliged to open its gates to Dunois. Succors at last appeared
from England, under Sir Thomas Kyriel, and landed at Cherbourg: but
these came very late, amounted only to four thousand men, and were
soon after put to rout at Fourmigni by the count of Clermont.[**] This
battle, or rather skirmish, was the only action fought by the English
for the defence of their dominions in France, which they had purchased
at such an expense of blood and treasure. Somerset, shut up in Caen,
without any prospect of relief, found it necessary to capitulate:
Falaise opened its gates, on condition that the earl of Shrewsbury
should be restored to liberty: and Cherbourg, the last place of Normandy
which remained in the hands of the English, being delivered up, the
conquest of that important province was finished in a twelvemonth
by Charles, to the great joy of the inhabitants, and of his whole
kingdom.[***]
* Monstrelet, vol. iii. p. 21. Grafton, p. 643.
** Holing, p. 631.
*** Grafton, p. 646.
A like rapid success attended the French arms in Guienne; though the
inhabitants of that province were, from long custom, better inclined to
the English government. Dunois was despatched thither, and met with
no resistance in the field, and very little from the towns. Great
improvements had been made during this age in the structure and
management of artillery, and none in fortification; and the art of
defence was by that means more unequal, than either before or since,
to the art of attack. After all the small places about Bordeaux were
reduced, that city agreed to submit, if not relieved by a certain time;
and as no one in England thought Seriously of these distant concerns,
no relief appeared; the place surrendered; and Bayonne being taken soon
after, this whole province, which had remained united to England since
the accession of Henry II., was, after a period of three centuries,
finally swallowed up in the French monarchy.
Though no peace or truce was concluded between France and England, the
war was in a manner at an end. The English, torn in pieces by the
civil dissensions which ensued, made but one feeble effort more for the
recovery of Guienne, and Charles, occupied at home in regulating the
government, and fencing against the intrigues of his factious son, Lewis
the dauphin, scarcely ever attempted to invade them in their island,
or to retaliate upon them, by availing himself of their intestine
confusions.
HENRY VI.
{1450.} A WEAK prince, seated on the throne of England, had never
failed, how gentle soever and innocent, to be infested with faction,
discontent, rebellion, and evil commotions; and as the incapacity of
Henry appeared every day in a fuller light, these dangerous consequences
began, from past experience, to be universally and justly apprehended
Men also of unquiet spirits, no longer employed in foreign wars, whence
they were now excluded by the situation of the neighboring states, were
the more likely to excite intestine, disorders, and by their emulation,
rivalship, and animosities, to tear the bowels of their native country.
But though these causes alone were sufficient to breed confusion,
there concurred another circumstance of the most dangerous, nature: a
pretender to the crown appeared: the tie itself of the weak prince who
enjoyed the name of sovereignty, was disputed; and the English were now
to pay the severe though late penalty of their turbulence under Richard
II., and of their levity in violating, without any necessity or just
reason, the lineal succession of their monarchs.
All the males of the house of Mortimer were extinct; but Anne,
the sister of the last earl of Marche, having espoused the earl of
Cambridge, beheaded in the reign of Henry V. had transmitted her latent,
but not yet forgotten claim to be; on Richard, duke of York. This
prince, thus descended by his mother from Philippa, only daughter of the
duke of Clarence, second son of Edward III., stood plainly in the order
of succession before the king, who derived his descent from the duke of
Lancaster, third son of that monarch; and that claim could not, in many
respects, have fallen into more dangerous hands man those of the duke of
York. Richard was a man of valor and abilities, of a prudent conduct
and mild disposition: he had enjoyed an opportunity of displaying these
virtues in his government of France; and though recalled from that
command by the intrigues and superior interest of the duke of Somerset,
he had been sent to suppress a rebellion in Ireland; had succeeded much
better in that enterprise than his rival in the defence of Normandy, and
had even been able to attach to his person and family the whole Irish
nation, whom he was sent to subdue.[*] In the right of his father, he
bore the rank of first prince of the blood; and by this station he gave
a lustre to his title derived from the family of Mortimer, which, though
of great nobility, was equalled by other families in the kingdom, and
had been eclipsed by the royal descent of the house of Lancaster. He
possessed an immense fortune from the union of so many successions,
those of Cambridge and York on the one hand, with those of Mortimer on
the other; which last inheritance had before been augmented by a union
of the estates of Clarence and Ulster with the patrimonial possessions
of the family of Marche. The alliances too of Richard, by his marrying
the daughter of Ralph Nevil, earl of Westmoreland, had widely extended
his interest among the nobility, and had procured him many connections
in that formidable order.
* Stowe, p. 387.
The family of Nevil was perhaps at this time the most potent, both from
their opulent possessions and from the characters of the men, that has
ever appealed in England. For, besides the earl of Westmoreland, and the
lords Latimer, Fauconberg, and Abergavenny, the earls of Salisbury and
Warwick were of that family, and were of themselves, on many
accounts, the greatest noblemen in the kingdom. The earl of Salisbury,
brother-in-law to the duke of York, was the eldest son by a second
marriage of the earl of Westmoreland; and inherited by his wife,
daughter and heir of Montacute, earl of Salisbury, killed before
Orleans, the possessions and title of that great family. His eldest son,
Richard, had married Anne, the daughter and heir of Beauchamp, earl of
Warwick, who died governor of France; and by this alliance he enjoyed
the possessions, and had acquired the title, of that other family, one
of the most opulent, most ancient, and most illustrious in England.
The personal qualities also of these two earls, especially of Warwick
enhanced the splendor of their nobility, and increased then influence
over the people. This latter nobleman commonly known, from the
subsequent events, by the appellation of the “king-maker,” had
distinguished himself by his gallantry in the field, by the hospitality
of his table, by Ore magnificence, and still more by the generosity, of
his expense, and by the spirited and bold manner which attended him in
all his actions. The undesigning frankness and openness of his character
rendered his conquest over men’s affections the more certain and
infallible: his presents were regarded as sure testimonials of esteem
and friendship; and his professions as the over-flowings of his genuine
sentiments. No less than thirty thousand persons are said to have
daily lived at his board In the different manors and castles which he
possessed in England: the military men, allured by his munificence and
hospitality, as well as by his bravery, were zealously attached to his
interests: the people in general bore him an unlimited affection: his
numerous retainers were more devoted to his will than to the prince
or to the laws: and he was the greatest, as well as the last, of those
mighty barons who formerly overawed the crown, and rendered the people
incapable of any regular system of civil government.
But the duke of York, besides the family of Nevil, had many other
partisans among the great nobility. Courtney, earl of Devonshire,
descended from a very noble family of that name in France, was attached
to his interests: Moubray, duke of Norfolk, had, from his hereditary
hatred to the family of Lancaster, embraced the same party: and the
discontents which universally prevailed among the people, rendered
every combination of the great the more dangerous to the established
government.
Though the people were never willing to grant the supplies necessary for
keeping possession of the conquered provinces in France, they repined
extremely at the loss of these boasted acquisitions; and fancied,
because a sudden irruption could make conquests, that, without steady
counsels and a uniform expense, it was possible to maintain them. The
voluntary cession of Maine to the queen’s uncle, had made them suspect
treachery in the loss of Normandy and Guienne. They still considered
Margaret as a French woman, and a latent enemy of the kingdom. And
when they saw her father and all her relations active in promoting the
success of the French, they could not be persuaded that she, who was
all-powerful in the English council, would very zealously oppose them in
their enterprises.
But the most fatal blow given to the popularity of the crown and to
the interests of the house of Lancaster, was by the assassination of the
virtuous duke of Glocester; whose character, had he been alive,
would have intimidated the partisans of York; but whose memory, being
extremely cherished by the people, served to throw an odium on all his
murderers. By this crime the reigning family suffered a double prejudice
it was deprived of its firmest support; and it was loaded with all the
infamy of that imprudent and barbarous assassination.
As the duke of Suffolk was known to have had an active hand in the
crime, he partook deeply of the hatred attending it; and the clamors
which necessarily rose against him, as prime minister and declared
favorite of the queen, were thereby augmented to a tenfold pitch, and
became absolutely uncontrollable. The great nobility could ill brook
to see a subject exalted above them; much more one who was only
great-grandson to a merchant, and who was of a birth so much inferior to
theirs. The people complained of his arbitrary measures; which were,
in some degree, a necessary consequence of the irregular power then
possessed by the prince, but which the least disaffection easily
magnified into tyranny. The great acquisitions which he daily made were
the object of envy; and as they were gained at the expense of the crown,
which was itself reduced to poverty, they appeared on that account, to
all indifferent persons, the more exceptionable and invidious.
The revenues of the crown, which had long been disproportioned to its
power and dignity, had been extremely dilapidated during the minority of
Henry;[*] both by the rapacity of the courtiers, which the king’s uncles
could not control, and by the necessary expenses of the French war,
which had always been very ill supplied by the grants of parliament.
*: Cotton, p. 609.
The royal demesnes were dissipated; and at the same time the king was
loaded with a debt of three hundred and seventy-two thousand pounds, a
sum so great, that the parliament could never think of discharging
it. This unhappy situation forced the ministers upon many arbitrary
measures: the household itself could not be supported without stretching
to the utmost the right of purveyance, and rendering it a kind of
universal robbery upon the people: the public clamor rose high upon this
occasion, and no one had the equity to make allowance for the necessity
of the king’s situation. Suffolk, once become odious, bore the blame of
the whole; and every grievance, in every part of the administration, was
universally imputed to his tyranny and injustice.
This nobleman, sensible of the public hatred under which he labored, and
foreseeing an attack from the commons endeavored to overawe his enemies,
by boldly presenting himself to the charge, and by insisting upon his
own innocence and even upon his merits, and those of his family, in
the public service. He rose in the house of peers; took notice of the
clamors propagated against him; and complained that after serving the
crown in thirty-four campaigns; after living abroad seventeen years,
without once returning to his native country; after losing a father and
three brothers in the wars with France; after being himself a prisoner,
and purchasing his liberty by a great ransom; it should yet be
suspected, that he had been debauched from his allegiance by that enemy
whom he had ever opposed with such zeal and fortitude, and that he had
betrayed his prince, who had rewarded his services by the highest honors
and greatest offices that it was in his power to confer.[*] This speech
did not answer the purpose intended. The commons, rather provoked at his
challenge, opened their charge against him, and sent up to the peers
an accusation of high treason, divided into several articles. They
insisted, that he had persuaded the French king to invade England with
an armed force, in order to depose the king, and to place on the throne
his own son, John de la Pole, whom he intended to marry to Margaret,
the only daughter of the late John, duke of Somerset, and to whom, he
imagined, he would by that means acquire a title to the crown: that he
had contributed to the release of the duke of Orleans, in hopes that
that prince would assist King Charles in expelling the English from
France, and recovering full possession of his kingdom: that he had
afterwards encouraged that monarch to make open war on Normandy and
Guienne, and had promoted his conquests by betraying the secrets of
England, and obstructing the succors intended to be sent to those
provinces; and that he had, without any powers or commission, promised
by treaty to cede the province of Maine to Charles of Anjou, and had
accordingly ceded it; which proved in the issue the chief cause of the
loss of Normandy.[**]
* Cotton, p. 641.
** Cotton, p. 642. Hall, fol. 157. Holing, p. 631. Grafton,
p. 607
It is evident, from a review of these articles, that the commons adopted
without inquiry all the popular clamors against the duke of Suffolk,
and charged him with crimes of which none but the vulgar could seriously
believe him guilty. Nothing can be more incredible, than that a
nobleman, so little eminent by his birth and character, could think
of acquiring the crown to his family, and of deposing Henry by foreign
force, and, together with him, Margaret, his patron, a princess of so
much spirit and penetration. Suffolk appealed to many noblemen in the
house, who knew that he had intended to marry his son to one of the
coheirs of the earl of Warwick, and was disappointed in his views only
by the death of that lady: and he observed, that Margaret of Somerset
could bring to her husband no title to the crown; because she herself
was not so much as comprehended in the entail settled by act of
parliament. It is easy to account for the loss of Normandy and Guienne,
from the situation of affairs in the two kingdoms, without supposing any
treachery in the English ministers; and it may safely be affirmed, that
greater vigor was requisite to defend these provinces from the arms of
Charles VII., than to conquer them at first from his predecessor.
It could never be the interest of any English minister to betray and
abandon such acquisitions; much less of one who was so well established
in his master’s favor, who enjoyed such high honors and ample
possessions in his own country, who had nothing to dread but the effects
of popular hatred and who could never think, without the most extreme
reluctance, of becoming a fugitive and exile in a foreign land. The only
article which carries any face of probability, is his engagement for
the delivery of Maine to the queen’s uncle: but Suffolk maintained, with
great appearance of truth, that this measure was approved of by several
at the council table; [*] and it seems hard to ascribe to it, as is done
by the commons, the subsequent loss of Normandy and expulsion of the
English. Normandy lay open on every side to the invasion of the French:
Maine, an inland province, must soon after have fallen without any
attack; and as the English possessed in other parts more fortresses than
they could garrison or provide for, it seemed no bad policy to contract
their force, and to render the defence practicable, by reducing it
within a narrower compass.
* Cotton, p.643.
The commons were probably sensible, that this charge of treason against
Suffolk would not bear a strict scrutiny; and they therefore, soon
after, sent up against him a new charge of misdemeanors, which they also
divided into several articles. They affirmed, among other imputations,
that he had procured exorbitant grants from the crown, had embezzled the
public money, had conferred offices on improper persons, had perverted
justice by maintaining iniquitous causes, and had procured pardons for
notorious offenders.[*] The articles are mostly general, but are not
improbable; and as Suffolk seems to have been a bad man and a bad
minister, it will not be rash in us to think that he was guilty, and
that many of these articles could have been proved against him. The
court was alarmed at the prosecution of a favorite minister, who lay
under such a load of popular prejudices; and an expedient was fallen
upon to save him from present ruin. The king summoned all the lords,
spiritual and temporal, to his apartment: the prisoner was produced
before them, and asked what he could say in his own defence: he denied
the charge; but submitted to the king’s mercy: Henry expressed himself
not satisfied with regard to the first impeachment for treason; but
in consideration of the second for misdemeanors, he declared that, by
virtue of Suffolk’s own submission, not by any judicial authority, he
banished him the kingdom during five years. The lords remained silent;
but as soon as they returned to their own house, they entered a protest,
that this sentence should nowise infringe their privileges, and that, if
Suffolk had insisted upon his right, and had not voluntarily submitted
to the king’s commands, he was entitled to a trial by his peers in
parliament.
It was easy to see, that these irregular proceedings were meant to favor
Suffolk, and that, as he still possessed the queen’s confidence, he
would, on the first favorable opportunity, be restored to his country,
and be reinstated in his former power and credit. A captain of a vessel
was therefore employed by his enemies to intercept him in his passage to
France: he was seized near Dover; his head struck off on the side of
a long-boat; and his body thrown into the sea,[**] No inquiry was made
after the actors and accomplices in this atrocious deed of violence.
* Cotton, p. 643.
** Hall, fol. 158. Hist. Croyland, Contin. p. 525. Stowe, p.
388. Grafton, p. 610.
The duke of Somerset succeeded to Suffolk’s power in the ministry, and
credit with the queen; and as he was the person under whose government
the French provinces had been lost, the public, who always judge by the
event, soon made him equally the object of their animosity and hatred.
The duke of York was absent in Ireland during all these transactions
and however it might be suspected that his partisans had excited and
supported the prosecution against Suffolk, no immediate ground of
complaint could, on that account, lie against him. But there happened,
soon after, an incident which roused the jealousy of the court, and
discovered to them the extreme danger to which they were exposed from
the pretensions of that popular prince.
The humors of the people, set afloat by the parliamentary impeachment,
and by the fall of so great a favorite as Suffolk, broke out in various
commotions, which were soon suppressed, but there arose one in Kent
which was attended with more dangerous consequences. A man of low
condition, one John Cade, a native of Ireland, who had been obliged
to fly into France for crimes, observed, on his return to England,
the discontents of the people; and he laid on them the foundation of
projects which were at first crowned with surprising success. He took
the name of John Mortimer; intending, as is supposed, to pass himself
for a son of that Sir John Mortimer who had been sentenced to death by
parliament, and executed, in the beginning of this reign, without any
trial or evidence, merely upon an indictment of high treason given in
against him.[*] On the first mention of that popular name, the common
people of Kent, to the number of twenty thousand, flocked to Cade’s
standard; and he excited their zeal by publishing complaints against the
numerous abuses in government, and demanding a redress of grievances.
The court, not yet fully sensible of the danger, sent a small force
against the rioters, under the command of Sir Humphrey Stafford, who was
defeated and slain in an action near Sevenoke;[**] and Cade, advancing
with his followers towards London, encamped on Blackheath.
* Stowe, p. 364. Cotton, p. 564. This author admires that
such a piece of injustice should have been committed in
peaceable times: he might have added, and by such virtuous
princes as Bedford and Glocester. But it is to be presumed
that Mortimer was guilty; though his condemnation was highly
irregular and illegal. The people had at this time a very
feeble sense of law and a constitution; and power was very
imperfectly restrained by these limits. When the proceedings
of a parliament were so irregular it is easy to imagine that
those of a king would be more so.
** Hall, fol. 159. Holing. p, 634.
Though elated by his victory, he still maintained the appearance of
moderation; and sending to the court a plausible list of grievances,[*]
he promised that, when these should be redressed, and when Lord Say,
the treasurer, and Cromer, sheriff of Kent, should be punished for their
malversations, he would immediately lay down his arms. The council, who
observed that nobody was willing to fight against men so reasonable in
their pretensions, carried the king, for present safety, to Kenilworth;
and the city immediately opened its gates to Cade, who maintained,
during some time, great order and discipline among his followers. He
always led them into the fields during the night-time; and published
severe edicts against plunder and violence of every kind: but being
obliged, in order to gratify their malevolence against Say and Cromer,
to put these men to death without a legal trial,[**] he found that,
after the commission of this crime, he was no longer master of their
riotous disposition, and that all his orders were neglected.[***] They
broke into a rich house, which they plundered; and the citizens, alarmed
at this act of violence, shut their gates against them; and being
seconded by a detachment of soldiers, sent them by Lord Scales, governor
of the Tower, they repulsed the rebels with great slaughter.[****] The
Kentish men were so discouraged by the blow, that upon receiving a
general pardon from the primate, then chancellor, they retreated towards
Rochester, and there dispersed. The pardon was soon after annulled, as
extorted by violence: a price was set on Cade’s head,[*****] who was
killed by one Iden, a gentleman of Sussex; and many of his followers
were capitally punished for their rebellion.
It was imagined by the court, that the duke of York had secretly
instigated Cade to this attempt, in order to try, by that experiment,
the dispositions of the people towards his title and family:[*] and as
the event had so far succeeded to his wish, the ruling party had
greater reason than ever to apprehend the future consequences of his
pretensions.
* Stowe, p. 388, 389. Holing, p. 633.
** Grafton, p. 612.
*** Hall, fol. 160.
**** Hist. Croyland, Contin.p. 526.
***** Rymer, vol. xi p. 275.
****** Cotton, p. 661.
At the same time they heard that he intended to return from Ireland;
and fearing that he meant to bring an armed force along with him, they
issued orders, in the king’s name, for opposing him, and for debarring
him entrance into England.[*] But the duke refuted his enemies by coming
attended with no more than his ordinary retinue: the precautions of the
ministers served only to show him their jealousy and malignity against
him: he was sensible that his title, by being dangerous to the king,
was also become dangerous to himself: he now saw the impossibility of
remaining in his present situation, and the necessity of proceeding
forward in support of his claim. His partisans, therefore, were
instructed to maintain, in all companies, his right by succession, and
by the established laws and constitution of the kingdom: these questions
became every day more and more the subject of conversation: the minds
of men were insensibly sharpened against each other by disputes, before
they came to more dangerous extremities: and various topics were pleaded
in support of the pretensions of each party.
* Stowe, p, 394.
The partisans of the house of Lancaster maintained that, though the
elevation of Henry IV. might at first be deemed somewhat irregular, and
could not be justified by any of those principles on which that prince
chose to rest his title, it was yet founded on general consent, was a
national act, and was derived from the voluntary approbation of a free
people, who, being loosened from their allegiance by the tyranny of the
preceding government, were moved by gratitude, as well as by a sense
of public interest, to intrust the sceptre into the hands of their
deliverer: that, even if that establishment were allowed to be at first
invalid, it had acquired solidity by time; the only principle which
ultimately gives authority to government, and removes those scruples
which the irregular steps attending almost all revolutions, naturally
excite in the minds of the people: that the right of succession was a
rule admitted only for general good, and for the maintenance of
public order; and could never be pleaded to the overthrow of national
tranquillity, and the subversion of regular establishments; that the
principles of liberty, no less than the maxims of internal peace,
were injured by these pretensions of the house of York; and if so many
reiterated acts of the legislature, by which the crown was entailed on
the present family, were now invalidated, the English must be considered
not as a free people, who could dispose of their own government, but as
a troop of slaves, who were implicitly transmitted by succession from
one master to another that the nation was bound to allegiance under the
house of Lancaster by moral no less than by political duty; and were
they to infringe those numerous oaths of fealty which they had sworn to
Henry and his predecessors, they would thenceforth be thrown loose from
all principles, and it would be found difficult ever after to fix and
restrain them: that the duke of York himself had frequently done homage
to the king as his lawful sovereign, and had thereby, in the most solemn
manner, made an indirect renunciation of those claims with which he now
dared to disturb the tranquillity of the public: that even though the
violation of the rights of blood, made on the deposition of Richard, was
perhaps rash and imprudent, it was too late to remedy the mischief; the
danger of a disputed succession could no longer be obviated; the people,
accustomed to a government which, in the hands of the late king,
had been so glorious, and in that of his predecessor, so prudent and
salutary, would still ascribe a right to it; by causing multiplied
disorders, and by shedding an inundation of blood, the advantage would
only be obtained of exchanging one pretender for another; and the
house of York itself, if established on the throne, would, on the first
opportunity, be exposed to those revolutions, which the giddy spirit
excited in the people gave so much reason to apprehend: and that, though
the present king enjoyed not the shining talents which had appeared
in his father and grandfather, he might still have a son who should
be endowed with them; he is himself eminent for the most harmless and
inoffensive manners; and if active princes were dethroned on pretence
of tyranny, and indolent ones on the plea of incapacity, there would
thenceforth remain in the constitution no established rule of obedience
to any sovereign.
Those strong topics in favor of the house of Lancaster, were opposed
by arguments no less convincing on the side of the house of York. The
partisans of this latter family asserted, that the maintenance of order
in the succession of princes, far from doing injury to the people, or
invalidating their fundamental title to good government, was established
only for the purposes of government, and served to prevent those
numberless confusions which must ensue, if no rule were followed but the
uncertain and disputed views of present convenience and advantage:
that the same maxims which insured public peace, were also salutary to
national liberty the privileges of the people could only be maintained
by the observance of laws; and if no account were made of the rights of
the sovereign, it could less be expected that any regard would be paid
to the property and freedom of the subject: that it was never too late
to correct any pernicious precedent; an unjust establishment, the longer
it stood, acquired the greater sanction and validity; it could, with
more appearance of reason, be pleaded as an authority for a like
injustice; and the maintenance of it, instead of favoring public
tranquillity, tended to disjoint every principle by which human society
was supported: that usurpers would be happy, if their present possession
of power, or their continuance for a few years, could convert them into
legal princes; but nothing would be more miserable than the people, if
all restraints on violence and ambition were thus removed, and a full
scope given to the attempts of every turbulent innovator: that time
indeed might bestow solidity on a government whose first foundations
were the most infirm; but it required both a long course of time to
produce this effect, and the total extinction of those claimants whose
title was built on the original principles of the constitution: that the
deposition of Richard II., and the advancement of Henry IV., were not
deliberate national acts, but the result of the levity and violence of
the people, and proceeded from those very defects in human nature which
the establishment of political society, and of an order in succession,
was calculated to prevent: that the subsequent entails of the crown
were a continuance of the same violence and usurpation; they were not
ratified by the legislature, since the consent of the rightful king was
still wanting; and the acquiescence, first of the family of Mortimer,
then of the family of York, proceeded from present necessity, and
implied no renunciation of their pretensions that the restoration of
the true order of succession could not be considered as a change which
familiarized the people to devolutions; but as the correction of
a former abuse, which had itself encouraged the giddy spirit of
innovation, rebellion, and disobedience: and that, as the original
title of Lancaster stood only, in the person of Henry IV., on present
convenience, even this principle, unjustifiable as it was when not
supported by laws and warranted by the constitution, had now entirely
gone over to the other side; nor was there any comparison between a
prince utterly unable to sway the sceptre, and blindly governed by
corrupt ministers, or by an imperious queen, engaged in foreign and
hostile interests and a prince of mature years, of approved wisdom and
experience, a native of England, the lineal heir of the crown, who, by
his restoration, would replace every thing on ancient foundations.
So many plausible arguments could be urged on both sides of this
interesting question, that the people were extremely divided in their
sentiments; and though the noblemen of greatest power and influence seem
to have espoused the party of York, the opposite cause had the advantage
of being supported by the present laws, and by the immediate possession
of royal authority. There were also many great noblemen in the
Lancastrian party, who balanced the power of their antagonists, and kept
the nation in suspense between them. The earl of Northumberland adhered
to the present government: the earl of Westmoreland, in spite of his
connections with the duke of York, and with the family of Nevil, of
which he was the head, was brought over to the same party; and the whole
north of England, the most warlike part of the kingdom, was, by means of
these two potent noblemen, warmly engaged in the interests of Lancaster.
Edmund Beaufort, duke of Somerset, and his brother Henry, were great
supports of that cause; as were also Henry Holland duke of Exeter,
Stafford, duke of Buckingham, the earl of Shrewsbury, the Lords
Clifford, Dudley, Scales, Audley, and other noblemen.
While the kingdom was in this situation, it might naturally be expected
that so many turbulent barons, possessed of so much independent
authority, would immediately have flown to arms, and have decided
the quarrel, after their usual manner, by war and battle, under the
standards of the contending princes. But there still were many causes
which retarded these desperate extremities, and made a long train of
faction, intrigue, and cabal, precede the military operations. By
the gradual progress of arts in England, as well as in other parts
of Europe, the people were now become of some importance; laws were
beginning to be respected by them; and it was requisite, by various
pretences, previously to reconcile their minds to the overthrow of such
an ancient establishment as that of the house of Lancaster, ere their
concurrence could reasonably be expected. The duke of York himself,
the new claimant, was of a moderate and cautious character, an enemy
to violence and disposed to trust rather to time and policy, than
to sanguinary measures, for the success of his pretensions. The very
imbecility itself of Henry tended to keep the factions in suspense, and
make them stand long in awe of each other: it rendered the Lancastrian
party unable to strike any violent blow against their enemies; it
encouraged the Yorkists to hope that, after banishing the king’s
ministers, and getting possession of his person, they might gradually
undermine his authority, and be able, without the perilous experiment
of a civil war, to change the succession by parliamentary and legal
authority.
{1451.} The dispositions which appeared in a parliament assembled
soon after the arrival of the duke of York from Ireland, favored these
expectations of his partisans, and both discovered an unusual boldness
in the commons, and were a proof of the general discontents which
prevailed against the administration. The lower house, without any
previous inquiry or examination, without alleging any other ground of
complaint than common fame, ventured to present a petition against the
duke of Somerset, the duchess of Suffolk, the bishop of Chester, Sir
John Sutton, Lord Dudley, and several others of inferior rank; and they
prayed the king to remove them forever from his person and councils, and
to prohibit them from approaching within twelve miles of the court.[*]
This was a violent attack, somewhat arbitrary, and supported but by few
precedents, against the ministry; yet the king durst not openly oppose
it: he replied that, except the lords, he would banish all the others
from court during a year, unless he should have occasion for their
service in suppressing any rebellion. At the same time he rejected a
bill, which had passed both houses, for attainting the late duke of
Suffolk, and which, in several of its clauses, discovered a very general
prejudice against the measures of the court.
{1452.} The duke of York, trusting to these symptoms, raised an army
of ten thousand men, with which he marched towards London, demanding a
reformation of the government, and the removal of the duke of Somerset
from all power and authority.[**] He unexpectedly found the gates of the
city shut against him; and on his retreating into Kent, he was followed
by the king at the head of a superior army; in which several of
Richard’s friends, particularly Salisbury and Warwick appeared; probably
with a view of mediating between the parties, and of seconding, on
occasion, the duke of York’s pretensions.
* Parl. Hist. vol. ii. p. 263.
** Stowe, p. 394.
A parley ensued; Richard still insisted upon the removal of Somerset,
and his submitting to a trial in parliament: the court pretended to
comply with his demand; and that nobleman was put in arrest: the duke
of York was then persuaded to pay his respects to the king in his
tent; and, on repeating his charge against the duke of Somerset, he was
surprised to see that minister step from behind the curtain, and offer
to maintain his innocence. Richard now found that he had been betrayed;
that he was in the hands of his enemies; and that it was become
necessary, for his own safety, to lower his pretensions. No violence,
however, was attempted against him: the nation was not in a disposition
to bear the destruction of so popular a prince: he had many friends in
Henry’s camp; and his son, who was not in the power of the court, might
still be able to revenge his death on all his enemies: he was therefore
dismissed; and he retired to his seat of Wigmore, on the borders of
Wales.[*]
While the duke of York lived in this retreat, there happened an incident
which, by increasing the public discontents, proved favorable to
his pretensions. Several Gascon lords, affectionate to the English
government, and disgusted at the new dominion of the French, came to
London, and offered to return to their allegiance under Henry.[**]
{1453.} The earl of Shrewsbury, with a body of eight thousand men, was
sent over to support them. Bordeaux opened its gates to him: he made
himself master of Fronsac, Castillon, and some other places: affairs
began to wear a favorable aspect; but as Charles hastened to resist
this dangerous invasion, the fortunes of the English were soon reversed:
Shrewsbury, a venerable warrior, above fourscore years of age, fell in
battle; his conquests were lost; Bordeaux was again obliged to submit
to the French king;[***] and all hopes of recovering the province of
Gascony were forever extinguished.
* Grafton, p. 620.
** Holing. p. 640.
*** Polyd. Virg. p. 501. Grafton, p. 623.
Though the English might deem themselves happy to be fairly rid of
distant dominions, which were of no use to them, and which they never
could defend against the growing power of France, they expressed
great discontent on the occasion: and they threw all the blame on the
ministry, who had not been able to effect impossibilities. While they
were in this disposition, the queen’s delivery of a son, who received
the name of Edward, was deemed no joyful incident; and as it removed
all hopes of the peaceable succession of the duke of York, who was
otherwise, in the right of his father, and by the laws enacted since
the accession of the house of Lancaster, next heir to the crown, it had
rather a tendency to inflame the quarrel between the parties. But
the duke was incapable of violent counsels; and even when no visible
obstacle lay between him and the throne, he was prevented by his own
scruples from mounting it.
{1454.} Henry, always unfit to exercise the government, fell at this
time into a distemper, which so far increased his natural imbecility,
that it rendered him incapable of maintaining even the appearance of
royalty. The queen and the council, destitute of this support, found
themselves unable to resist the York party; and they were obliged to
yield to the torrent. They sent Somerset to the Tower, and appointed
Richard lieutenant of the kingdom, with powers to open and hold a
session of parliament.[*]
* Rymer, vol. xi. p. 344.
That assembly, also, taking into consideration the state of the kingdom,
created him protector during pleasure. Men who thus intrusted sovereign
authority to one that had such evident and strong pretensions to
the crown, were not surely averse to his taking immediate and full
possession of it; yet the duke, instead of pushing them to make further
concessions, appeared somewhat timid and irresolute even in receiving
the power which was tendered to him. He desired that it might be
recorded in parliament, that this authority was conferred on him from
their own free motion, without any application on his part: he expressed
his hopes that they would assist him in the exercise of it: he made it a
condition of his acceptance, that the other lords who were appointed to
be of his council, should also accept of the trust, and should exercise
it; and he required, that all the powers of his office should be
specified and defined by act of parliament. This moderation of Richard
was certainly very unusual and very amiable; yet was it attended with
bad consequences in the present juncture; and by giving time to the
animosities of faction to rise and ferment, it proved the source of all
those furious wars and commotions which ensued.
The enemies of the duke of York soon found it in their power to make
advantage of his excessive caution. Henry being so far recovered from
his distemper, as to carry the appearance of exercising the royal power,
they moved him to resume his authority, to annul the protectorship
of the duke to release Somerset from the Tower,[*] and to commit the
administration into the hands of that nobleman.
{1455.} Richard, sensible of the dangers which might attend his former
acceptance of the parliamentary commission, should he submit to the
annulling of it, levied an army; but still without advancing any
pretensions to the crown. He complained only of the king’s ministers,
and demanded a reformation of the government. A battle was fought at St.
Albans, in which the Yorkists were superior, and, without suffering any
material loss, slew about five thousand of their enemies; among whom
were the duke of Somerset, the earl of Northumberland, the earl of
Stafford, eldest son of the duke of Buckingham, Lord Clifford, and many
other persons of distinction.[**] The king himself fell into the hands
of the duke of York, who treated him with great respect and tenderness:
he was only obliged (which he regarded as no hardship) to commit the
whole authority of the crown into the hands of his rival.
* Rymer, vol. xi. p. 361. Holing, p. 642. Grafton, p. 626.
** Stowe, p. 309. Holing, p. 643.
This was the first blood spilt in that fatal quarrel which was not
finished in less than a course of thirty years, which was signalized by
twelve pitched battles, which opened a scene of extraordinary fierceness
and cruelty, is computed to have cost the lives of eighty princes of the
blood, and almost entirely annihilated the ancient nobility of England.
The strong attachments, which, at that time, men of the same kindred
bore to each other, and the vindictive spirit, which was considered as
a point of honor, rendered the great families implacable in their
resentments, and every moment widened the breach between the parties.
Yet affairs did not immediately proceed to the last extremities; the
nation was kept some time in suspense; the vigor and spirit of Queen
Margaret, supporting her small power, still proved a balance to the
great authority of Richard, which was checked by his irresolute temper.
A parliament, which was soon after assembled, plainly discovered, by
the contrariety of their proceedings, the contrariety of the motives by
which they were actuated. They granted the Yorkists a general indemnity,
and they restored the protectorship to the duke, who, in accepting it,
still persevered in all his former precautions; but at the same time
they renewed their oaths of fealty to Henry, and fixed the continuance
of the protectorship to the majority of his son Edward, who was vested
with the usual dignities of prince of Wales, duke of Cornwall, and earl
of Chester. The only decisive act passed in this parliament, was a full
resumption of all the grants which had been made since the death of
Henry V., and which had reduced the crown to great poverty.
{1456.} It was not found difficult to wrest power from hands so little
tenacious as those of the duke of York. Margaret, availing herself of
that prince’s absence, produced her husband before the house of lords;
and as his state of health permitted him at that time to act his part
with some tolerable decency, he declared his intentions of resuming the
government, and of putting an end to Richard’s authority. This measure,
being unexpected, was not opposed by the contrary party; the house of
lords, who were many of them disgusted with the late act of resumption,
assented to Henry’s proposal; and the king was declared to be reinstated
in sovereign authority. Even the duke of York acquiesced in this
irregular act of the peers, and no disturbance ensued. But that prince’s
claim to the crown was too well known, and the steps which he had
taken to promote it were too evident ever to allow sincere trust and
confidence to have place between the parties.
{1457.} The court retired to Coventry, and invited the duke of York and
the earls of Salisbury and Warwick to attend the king’s person. When
they were on the road, they received intelligence that designs were
formed against their liberties and lives. They immediately separated
themselves; Richard withdrew to his castle of Wigmore; Salisbury to
Middleham, in Yorkshire, and Warwick to his government of Calais, which
had been committed to him after the battle of St. Albans, and which, as
it gave him the command of the only regular military force maintained
by England, was of the utmost importance in the present juncture. Still,
men of peaceable dispositions, and among the rest Bourchier, archbishop
of Canterbury, thought it not too late to interpose with their good
offices, in order to prevent that effusion of blood, with which the
kingdom was threatened; and the awe in which each party stood of the
other, rendered the mediation for some time successful. It was agreed
that all the great leaders on both sides should meet in London, and be
solemnly reconciled.
{1458.} The duke of York and his partisans came thither with numerous
retinues, and took up their quarters near each other for mutual
security. The leaders of the Lancastrian party used the same precaution.
The mayor, at the head of five thousand men, kept a strict watch,
night and day; and was extremely vigilant in maintaining peace between
them.[*]
* Fabian Chron. anno 1458. The author says that some lords
brought nine hundred retainers, some six hundred, none less
than four hundred. See also Grafton, p. 633.
Terms were adjusted, which removed not the ground of difference. An
outward reconciliation only was procured; and in order to notify this
accord to the whole people, a solemn procession to St. Paul’s was
appointed, where the duke of York led Queen Margaret, and a leader of
one party marched hand in hand with a leader of the opposite. The less
real cordiality prevailed, the more were the exterior demonstrations of
amity redoubled. But it was evident, that a contest for a crown could
not thus be peaceably accommodated; that each party watched only for
an opportunity of subverting the other; and that much blood must yet
be spilt, ere the nation could be restored to perfect tranquillity, or
enjoy a settled and established government.
{1459.} Even the smallest accident, without any formed design, was
sufficient, in the present disposition of men’s minds, to dissolve
the seeming harmony between the parties; and had the intentions of the
leaders been ever so amicable they would have found it difficult to
restrain the animosity of their followers. One of the king’s retinue
insulted one of the earl of Warwick’s: their companions on both sides
took part in the quarrel: a fierce combat ensued: the earl apprehended
his life to be aimed at: he fled to his government of Calais; and
both parties, in every county of England, openly made preparations for
deciding the contest by war and arms.
The earl of Salisbury, marching to join the duke of York, was overtaken
at Blore Heath, on the borders of Staffordshire, by Lord Audley, who
commanded much superior forces; and a small rivulet with steep banks
ran between the armies. Salisbury here supplied his defect in numbers
by stratagem, a refinement of which there occur few instances in
the English civil wars, where a headlong courage, more than military
conduct, is commonly to be remarked. He feigned a retreat, and allured
Audley to follow him with precipitation; but when the van of the royal
army had passed the brook, Salisbury suddenly turned upon them; and
partly by the surprise, partly by the division, of the enemies’ forces,
put this body to rout: the example of flight was followed by the rest
of the army: and Salisbury, obtaining a complete victory, reached the
general rendezvous of the Yorkists at Ludlow.[*]
The earl of Warwick brought over to this rendezvous a choice body of
veterans from Calais, on whom, it was thought the fortune of the war
would much depend; but this reënforcement occasioned, in the issue,
the immediate ruin of the duke of York’s party. When the royal army
approached, and a general action was every hour expected, Sir Andrew
Trollop, who commanded the veterans, deserted to the king in the
night-time; and the Yorkists were so dismayed at this instance of
treachery, which made every man suspicious of his fellow, that they
separated next day without striking a stroke:[**] the duke fled to
Ireland: the earl of Warwick, attended by many of the other leaders,
escaped to Calais; where his great popularity among all orders of
men, particularly among the military, soon drew to him partisans, and
rendered his power very formidable. The friends of the house of York in
England kept themselves every where in readiness to rise on the first
summons from their leaders.
[Illustration: 1_283_albans_abbey.jpg ST. ALBANS ABBEY]
{1460.} After meeting with some successes at sea, Warwick landed in
Kent, with the earl of Salisbury, and the earl of Marche, eldest son
of the duke of York; and being met by the primate, by Lord Cobham, and
other persons of distinction, he marched, amidst the acclamations of the
people, to London. The city immediately opened its gates to him; and
his troops increasing on every day’s march, he soon found himself in a
condition to face the royal army, which hastened from Coventry to attack
him. The battle was fought at Northampton; and was soon decided against
the royalists by the infidelity of Lord Grey of Ruthin, who, commanding
Henry’s van, deserted to the enemy during the heat of action, and spread
a consternation through the troops. The duke of Buckingham, the earl of
Shrewsbury, the Lords Beaumont and Egremont, and Sir William Lucie
were killed in the action or pursuit: the slaughter fell chiefly on
the gentry and nobility; the common people were spared by orders of the
earls of Warwick and Marche.[***]
* Holingshed, p. 649. Grafton, p. 936.
** Holingshed, p. 650. Grafton, p. 537
*** Stowe, p. 409.
Henry himself, that empty shadow of a king, was again taken prisoner;
and as the innocence and simplicity of his manners, which bore the
appearance of sanctity, had procured him the tender regard of the
people,[*] the earl of Warwick and the other leaders took care to
distinguish themselves by their respectful demeanor towards him.
A parliament was summoned in the king’s name, and met at Westminster;
where the duke soon after appeared from Ireland. This prince had never
hitherto advanced openly any claim to the crown: he had only complained
of ill ministers, and demanded a redress of grievances; and even in the
present crisis, when the parliament was surrounded by his victorious
army, he showed such a regard to law and liberty, as is unusual during
the prevalence of a party in any civil dissensions; and was still
less to be expected in those violent and licentious times. He advanced
towards the throne; and being met by the archbishop of Canterbury, who
asked him, whether he had yet paid his respects to the king, he replied,
that he knew of none to whom he owed that title. He then stood near the
throne,[**] and addressing himself to the house of peers, he gave them a
deduction of his title by descent, mentioned the cruelties by which the
house of Lancaster had paved their way to sovereign power, insisted on
the calamities which had attended the government of Henry, exhorted them
to return into the right path, by doing justice to the lineal successor,
and thus pleaded his cause before them as his natural and legal
judges.[***] This cool and moderate manner of demanding a crown
intimidated his friends and encouraged his enemies: the lords remained
in suspense;[****] and no one ventured to utter a word on the occasion.
* Hall, fol. 169. Grafton, p. 195.
** Holingshed, p. 650
*** Cotton, p. 665. Grafton, p. 643.
**** Holingshed, p. 657. Grafton, p. 645.
Richard, who had probably expected that the peers would have invited him
to place himself on the throne, was much disappointed at their silence;
but desiring them to reflect on what he had proposed to them, he
departed the house. The peers took the matter into consideration, with
as much tranquillity as if it had been a common subject of debate: they
desired the assistance of some considerable members among the commons in
their deliberations: they heard in several successive days, the reasons
alleged for the duke of York: they even ventured to propose objections
to his claim founded on former entails of the crown, and on the oaths
of fealty sworn to the house of Lancaster:[*] they also observed that as
Richard had all along borne the arms of York, not those of Clarence, he
could not claim as successor to the latter family: and after receiving
answers to these objections, derived from the violence and power by
which the house of Lancaster supported their present possession of the
crown, they proceeded to give a decision. Their sentence was calculated,
as far as possible, to please both parties: they declared the title of
the duke of York to be certain and indefeasible; but in consideration
that Henry had enjoyed the crown, without dispute or controversy,
during the course of thirty-eight years, they determined that he should
continue to possess the title and dignity during the remainder of his
life; that the administration of the government, meanwhile, should
remain with Richard; that he should be acknowledged the true and lawful
heir of the monarchy; that every one should swear to maintain his
succession, and it should be treason to attempt his life; and that all
former settlements of the crown, in this and the two last reigns, should
be abrogated and rescinded.[**] The duke acquiesced in this decision:
Henry himself, being a prisoner, could not oppose it: even if he
had enjoyed his liberty, he would not probably have felt any violent
reluctance against it: and the act thus passed with the unanimous
consent of the whole legislative body. Though the mildness of this
compromise is chiefly to be ascribed to the moderation of the duke of
York, it is impossible not to observe in those transactions visible
marks of a higher regard to law, and of a more fixed authority enjoyed
by parliament, than has appeared in any former period of English
history.
* Cotton, p. 666.
** Cotton, p. 666. Grafton, p. 647.
It is probable that the duke, without employing either menaces or
violence, could have obtained from the commons a settlement more
consistent and uniform: but as many, if not all the members of the upper
house, had received grants, concession, or dignities, during the
last sixty years, when the house of Lancaster was possessed of the
government, they were afraid of invalidating their own titles by too
sudden and violent an overthrow of that family; and in thus temporizing
between the parties, they fixed the throne on a basis upon which it
could not possibly stand. The duke, apprehending his chief danger to
arise from the genius and spirit of Queen Margaret sought a pretence for
banishing her the kingdom: he sent her, in the king’s name, a summons to
come immediately to London; intending, in case of her disobedience, to
proceed to extremities against her. But the queen needed not this menace
to excite her activity in defending the rights of her family. After
the defeat at Northampton, she had fled with her infant son to Durham,
thence to Scotland; but soon returning, she applied to the northern
barons, and employed every motive to procure their assistance.
Her affability, insinuation, and address,--qualities in which she
excelled,--her caresses, her promises, wrought a powerful effect on
every one who approached her: the admiration of her great qualities was
succeeded by compassion towards her helpless condition: the nobility
of that quarter, who regarded themselves as the most warlike in the
kingdom, were moved by indignation to find the southern barons pretend
to dispose of the crown and settle the government. And that they might
allure the people to their standard, they promised them the spoils of
all the provinces on the other side of the Trent. By these means, the
queen had collected an army twenty thousand strong, with a celerity
which was neither expected by her friends nor apprehended by her
enemies.
The duke of York, informed of her appearance in the north, hastened
thither with a body of five thousand men, to suppress, as he imagined,
the beginnings of an insurrection; when, on his arrival at Wakefield,
he found himself so much outnumbered by the enemy. He threw himself
into Sandal Castle, which was situated in the neighborhood; and he was
advised by the earl of Salisbury, and other prudent counsellors, to
remain in that fortress till his son, the earl of Marche, who
was levying forces in the borders of Wales, could advance to his
assistance.[*] But the duke, though deficient in political courage,
possessed personal bravery in an eminent degree; and notwithstanding his
wisdom and experience, he thought that he should be forever disgraced,
if, by taking shelter behind walls, he should for a moment resign the
victory to a woman.
* Stowe, p. 412.
He descended into the plain, and offered battle to the enemy, which was
instantly accepted. The great inequality of numbers was sufficient alone
to decide the victory; but the queen, by sending a detachment, who
fell on the back of the duke’s army, rendered her advantage still more
certain and undisputed. The duke himself was killed in the action;
and as his body was found among the slain, the head was cut off by
Margaret’s orders, and fixed on the gates of York, with a paper crown
upon it, in derision of his pretended title. His son, the earl of
Rutland, a youth of seventeen, was brought to Lord Clifford; and that
barbarian, in revenge of his father’s death, who had perished in the
battle of St. Albans, murdered in cool blood, and with his own
hands, this innocent prince, whose exterior figure, as well as other
accomplishments, are represented by historians as extremely amiable.
The earl of Salisbury was wounded and taken prisoner, and immediately
beheaded, with several other persons of distinction, by martial law at
Pomfret.[*] There fell near three thousand Yorkists in this battle: the
duke himself was greatly and justly lamented by his own party; a
prince who merited a better fate, and whose errors in conduct proceeded
entirely from such qualities as render him the more an object of esteem
and affection. He perished in the fiftieth year of his age, and left
three sons, Edward, George, and Richard, with three daughters, Anne,
Elizabeth, and Margaret.
{1461.} The queen, after this important victory, divided her army. She
sent the smaller division, under Jasper Tudor, earl of Pembroke, half
brother to the king, against Edward the new duke of York. She herself
marched with the larger division towards London, where the earl of
Warwick had been left with the command of the Yorkists. Pembroke was
defeated by Edward at Mortimer’s Cross, in Herefordshire, with the loss
of near four thousand men: his army was dispersed; he himself escaped
by flight; but his father, Sir Owen Tudor, was taken prisoner, and
immediately beheaded by Edward’s orders. This barbarous practice, being
once begun, was continued by both parties, from a spirit of revenge,
which covered itself under the pretence of retaliation.[**]
* Poivd. Virg. p 510.
** Holingshed, p. 660. Grafton, p. 650.
Margaret compensated this defeat by a victory which she obtained over
the earl of Warwick. That nobleman on the approach of the Lancastrians,
led out his army, reënforced by a strong body of the Londoners, who
were affectionate to his cause; and he gave battle to the queen at St.
Albans. While the armies were warmly engaged, Lovelace, who commanded
a considerable body of the Yorkists, withdrew from the combat; and this
treacherous conduct, of which there are many instances in those civil
wars, decided the victory in favor of the queen. About two thousand
three hundred of the vanquished perished in the battle and pursuit; and
the person of the king fell again into the hands of his own party. This
weak prince was sure to be almost equally a prisoner whichever faction
had the keeping of him; and scarce any more decorum was observed by one
than by the other, in their method of treating him. Lord Bonville, to
whose care he had been intrusted by the Yorkists, remained with him
after the defeat, on assurances of pardon given him by Henry: but
Margaret, regardless of her husband’s promise, immediately ordered the
head of that nobleman to be struck off by the executioner.[*] Sir Thomas
Kiriel, a brave warrior, who had signalized himself in the French wars,
was treated in the same manner.
The queen made no great advantage of this victory: young Edward advanced
upon her from the other side; and collecting the remains of Warwick’s
army, was soon in a condition of giving her battle with superior forces.
She was sensible of her danger, while she lay between the enemy and the
city of London; and she found it necessary to retreat with her army to
the north.[**]
* Holingshed, p. 660.
** Grafton, p. 652.
Edward entered the capital amidst the acclamations of the citizens, and
immediately opened a new scene to his party. This prince, in the bloom
of youth, remarkable for the beauty of this person, for his bravery, his
activity, his affability, and every popular quality, found himself so
much possessed of public favor, that, elated with the spirit natural to
his age, he resolved no longer to confine himself within those narrow
limits which his father had prescribed to himself, and which had been
found by experience so prejudicial to his cause. He determined to
assume the name and dignity of king; to insist openly on his claim; and
thenceforth to treat the opposite party as traitors and rebels to his
lawful authority. But as a national consent, or the appearance of it,
still seemed, notwithstanding his plausible title, requisite to precede
this bold measure, and as the assembling of a parliament might occasion
too many delays, and be attended with other inconveniences, he ventured
to proceed in a less regular manner, and to put it out of the power of
his enemies to throw obstacles in the way of his elevation. His army
was ordered to assemble in St. John’s Fields; great numbers of people
surrounded them; an harangue was pronounced to this mixed multitude,
setting forth the title of Edward, and inveighing against the tyranny
and usurpation of the rival family; and the people were then asked
whether they would have Henry of Lancaster for king. They unanimously
exclaimed against the proposal. It was then demanded whether they would
accept of Edward, eldest son of the late duke of York. They expressed
their assent by loud and joyful acclamations.[*] A great number of
bishops, lords, magistrates, and other persons of distinction were next
assembled at Baynard’s Castle, who ratified the popular election; and
the new king was on the subsequent day proclaimed in London, by the
title of Edward IV.[**]
In this manner ended the reign of Henry VI., a monarch, who, while in
his cradle, had been proclaimed king both of France and England, and
who began his life with the most splendid prospects that any prince in
Europe had ever enjoyed. The revolution was unhappy for his people, as
it was the source of civil wars; but was almost entirely indifferent to
Henry himself, who was utterly incapable of exercising his authority,
and who, provided he personally met with good usage, was equally easy,
as he was equally enslaved, in the hands of his enemies and of his
friends. His weakness and his disputed title were the chief causes of
the public calamities: but whether his queen and his ministers were not
also guilty of some great abuses of power, it is not easy for us at this
distance of time to determine: there remain no proofs on record of any
considerable violation of the laws, except in the assassination of the
duke of Glocester, which was a private crime, formed no precedent, and
was but too much of a piece with the usual ferocity and cruelty of the
times.
The most remarkable law which passed in this reign, was that for the
due election of members of parliament in counties. After the fall of the
feudal system, the distinction of tenures was in some measure lost;
and every freeholder, as well those who held of mesne lords, as the
immediate tenants of the crown, were by degrees admitted to give
their votes at elections. This innovation (for such it may probably be
esteemed) was indirectly confirmed by a law of Henry IV.[***] which
gave right to such a multitude of electors, as was the occasion of great
disorder.
* Stowe, p. 415. Holingshed, p. 661.
** Grafton, p. 653.
*** Statutes at large, 7 Henry IV. ca. 15.
In the eighth and tenth of this king, therefore, laws were enacted,
limiting the electors to such as possessed forty shillings a year
in land, free from all burdens within the county.[*] This sum was
equivalent to near twenty pounds a year of our present money, and it
were to be wished, that the spirit, as well as letter, of this law had
been maintained.
The preamble of the statute is remarkable: “Whereas the elections
of knights have of late, in many counties of England, been made by
outrageous and excessive numbers of people, many of them of small
substance and value, yet pretending to a right equal to the best knights
and esquires; whereby manslaughters, riots, batteries, and divisions
among the gentlemen and other people of the same counties, shall very
likely rise and be, unless due remedy be provided in this behalf,
etc.” We may learn from these expressions, what an important matter
the election of a member of parliament was now become in England: that
assembly was beginning in this period to assume great authority: the
commons had it much in their power to enforce the execution of the laws;
and if they failed of success in this particular, it proceeded less from
any exorbitant power of the crown, than from the licentious spirit of
the aristocracy, and perhaps from the rude education of the age,
and their own ignorance of the advantages resulting from a regular
administration of justice.
When the duke of York, the earls of Salisbury and Warwick, fled the
kingdom upon the desertion of their troops, a parliament was summoned
at Coventry in 1460, by which they were all attainted. This parliament
seems to have been very irregularly constituted, and scarcely deserves
the name; insomuch, that an act passed in it, “that all such knights of
any county, as were returned by virtue of the king’s letters, without
any other election, should be valid; and that no sheriff should, for
returning them, incur the penalty of the statute of Henry IV.” [**] All
the acts of that parliament were afterwards reversed; “because it was
unlawfully summoned, and the knights and barons not duly chosen.” [***]
* Statutes at large, 8 Henry VI. cap. 7. 10 Henry VI. cap.
2.
** Cotton, p. 664.
*** Statutes at large, 39 Henry VI. cap. 1
The parliaments in this reign, instead of relaxing their vigilance
against the usurpations of the court of Rome, endeavored to enforce the
former statutes enacted for that purpose. The commons petitioned, that
no foreigner should be capable of any church preferment, and that the
patron might be allowed to present anew upon the non-residence of any
incumbent:[*] but the king eluded these petitions. Pope Martin wrote
him a severe letter against the statute of provisors; which he calls
an abominable law, that would infallibly damn every one who observed
it.[**] The cardinal of Winchester was legate; and as he was also a kind
of prime minister, and immensely rich from the profits of his clerical
dignities, the parliament became jealous lest he should extend the papal
power; and they protested, that the cardinal should absent himself in
all affairs and councils of the king, whenever the pope or see of Rome
was touched upon.[***]
Permission was given by parliament to export corn when it was at low
prices; wheat at six shillings and eightpence a quarter, money of that
age; barley at three shillings and fourpence.[****] It appears from
these prices, that corn still remained at near half its present value;
though other commodities were much cheaper. The inland commerce of corn
was also opened in the eighteenth of the king, by allowing any collector
of the customs to grant a license of carrying it from one county to
another.[*****] The same year a kind of navigation act was proposed
with regard to all places within the Straits; but the king rejected
it.[******]
The first instance of debt contracted upon parliamentary security occurs
in this reign.[*******] The commencement of this pernicious practice
deserves to be noted; a practice the more likely to become pernicious,
the more a nation advances in opulence and credit. The ruinous effects
of it are now become apparent, and threaten the very existence of the
nation.
* Cotton, p. 585.
** Burnet’s Collection of Records, vol. i. p. 99.
*** Cotton, p. 593.
**** Statutes at large, 15 Henry VI. cap. 2. 23 Henry VI. cap.
6.
***** Cotton, p. 625.
****** Cotton, p. 626.
******* Cotton, p. 593, 614, 638.