From this time onwards the fortunes of England declined.

Difficulties accumulated on all sides. The long war had caused

such a drain on the finances, that the payment of the troops had

already been lowered, and a dangerous mutiny had broken out at

Calais. At the same time, Gloucester’s meddlesome and overbearing

character perpetually kept the Government at home in disturbance.

In 1428, an attack was made on the Bishop of Winchester. He had

returned from Rome a Cardinal, and with the rank of Papal Legate

for the purpose of collecting troops against the Hussites. His

authority thus clashed with that of the Archbishop of Canterbury,

who was _ex officio_ Legate when no one else was specially

appointed to that office. Displeased at being superseded, Chicheley

joined with Gloucester, and suggested that Winchester, by becoming

Legate without royal permission, had incurred the penalties of

præmunire. Winchester was therefore excluded from the Council,

and from the Chapter of the Garter, of which he was the Prelate,

held in 1429. His place in the Council was restored to him in

gratitude for his conduct in the following year, when he lent

troops to Bedford after the relief of Orleans. Nevertheless,

during his absence in 1431, he was asked to resign his bishopric,

as being the officer of a foreign power, and Gloucester brought

formal charges against him, and caused the writ of præmunire to be

actually prepared. The execution of the writ was postponed till

the King’s return, when Beaufort was allowed to clear himself,

and a declaration vouching for his loyalty given him under the

Great Seal. While thus attacking the Cardinal, Gloucester had been

attempting to increase his popularity, already very great, by

assuming the position of champion of the Church, and persecutor

of heresy. In 1430, a man calling himself Jack Sharpe had been

put to death at Oxford, and a clergyman of Essex had also been

burnt. But there was evidently still existing a strong undercurrent

of Lollardism; for the people came in crowds to the place of

execution, and made offerings as though the victim of persecution

had been a saint. But even worse for Bedford than these troubles

at home was the loss of his wife, who died in November 1432,

childless, thus breaking the strongest link which had hitherto

bound England and Burgundy together. This misfortune was made

worse by one of the few acts of indiscretion which can be alleged

against Bedford. He married Jacquetta, daughter of the Count of

Saint-Pol, of the House of Luxembourg, a marriage in itself politic

enough, but which, contracted as it was without the permission of

Burgundy, the lady’s feudal superior, caused a quarrel between

the two Dukes. This was the second heavy blow which the alliance

between England and Burgundy had received. Yet this alliance was

absolutely necessary for the successful carrying on of the war. It

began to be a question whether peace of some sort was not becoming

necessary. Bedford even in the year 1431 received leave from the

English Parliament to treat. Abroad the feeling in favour of peace

was still stronger. Pope Eugenius IV. had set seriously to work to

put an end to the warfare. The Emperor Sigismund, with Frederick

of Austria and Louis of Orange, alarmed at the rising power of

the Burgundian House, had made offers of assistance to the French

King. The Bretons, headed by the Count of Richemont, were anxious

to renew their natural alliance with France. Burgundy himself, in

1432, had gone so far as to make an armistice with the French; the

presence at the French Court of La Tremouille, one of the murderers

of the Duke’s father and the constant supporter of the war, seemed

the only obstacle to reconciliation: if that reconciliation were

made Bedford must of necessity make peace. Other difficulties

were leading him in the same direction. The finances were in

the greatest disorder; the garrison of Calais mutinied for pay.

Bedford therefore, in 1433, returned to England to see what could

be done. He made Lord Ralph Cromwell his treasurer, and intrusted

him with the duty of examining and making a statement as to the

condition of the finances. It became apparent that the yearly

outgoing exceeded the income by £25,000. Bedford at once insisted

on economy, and patriotically gave up a considerable portion of

his own salaries. But the discovery of his failing resources, the

necessity for his presence in England, where Lords and Commons

united in intreating him to remain, the increase of the power of

France, and the constant danger of reconciliation between Charles

and Burgundy, induced him to be quite ready to make arrangements

for a peace on honourable terms which should include the possession

of Normandy. Such views did not suit Gloucester. He put himself

prominently forward as the head of the war party, producing a great

but impracticable plan for pressing the war with vigour. Bedford’s

residence in England was short. During his absence all went wrong;

St. Denis was lost, and the Earl of Arundel taken prisoner. He was

forced to return to France, and to leave the parties in England

(now clearly defined as peace and war parties) to carry on their

quarrels. But the general feeling for the necessity of peace,

and for the release from their long imprisonment of the captives

taken at Agincourt, gained ground abroad. So much was this the

case, that Burgundy found means to assemble on the 14th of July

what may be fairly called a European congress, at Arras, to

settle if possible the peace of Europe. Thither came ambassadors

from the Council of Bâle, (at that time sitting,) the Legate

of the Pope, and ministers from the Emperor, Castile, Aragon,

Navarre, Portugal, Naples, Sicily, Poland, Denmark, the Parisian

University, and the great commercial towns of the Hansa and of

Flanders. Archbishop John of York at first represented England.

The Duke of Bourbon, who had already entered into agreement with

Burgundy, represented France. Even on their first appearance, the

English ambassadors were displeased with the precedence given to

the French. The rival demands were these:--France wished either

for a peace with Burgundy, and the continuation of the war with

England, or if there was a cessation of that war, that the peace

should be unconditional, with the restoration of all prisoners

and all conquests, the three Norman bishoprics alone being left

to the English, and those only as fiefs of the French crown; the

English demanded the retention of their present possessions and

an armistice. The pretensions of the two nations were evidently

incompatible; even Cardinal Beaufort, who had joined the congress,

was afraid of the war party at home, and on the 6th of September

the English embassy withdrew.

[Sidenote: Bedford’s death. Consequent defection of Burgundy.]

[Sidenote: Obstinacy of the war party.]

At this inopportune moment an event happened which settled

the wavering mind of Burgundy, and induced him to make a full

reconciliation with the French. This event was the death of the

Duke of Bedford. There was no one to fill the place of that great

man. It had been his personal influence more than anything else

which had kept Burgundy true to England. On his death the Duke

at once declared himself ready to receive the terms which France

offered. These were humiliating enough. Charles apologized for the

death of Duke John, declared that he held the act in abhorrence,

that he had been brought to consent to it by the advice of wicked

ministers, and would henceforward exclude all Armagnacs from

his council. At the same time he granted to Burgundy, Macon and

Auxerre, together with the basin of the Somme, or Ponthieu. At

first, news of this treaty served only to arouse the warlike

feeling of the English. The appearance of the Burgundian envoy

in London was the signal for violent riots. It was determined to

prosecute the war with vigour. A great loan was raised throughout

the country, and the prosecution intrusted to the young Duke of

York. It was not to be expected that this young prince, however

great his ability, could do what Bedford had been unable to

accomplish. United with Burgundy, England had scarcely held its

position in France. Against France and Burgundy united, it was

helpless.

[Sidenote: Continued ill success. 1437.]

Already before York’s arrival a great piece of Normandy, and even

Harfleur, had been lost. In April the French King, with Burgundy,

advanced on Paris, and was admitted by the townspeople. The war

party grew only more obstinate. Gloucester revived his absurd

claims upon Flanders in right of Jacqueline, and assumed the title

of Count of Flanders. York and Talbot succeeded in driving back

the Burgundians from Calais; but this was almost the only English

success. In July 1437, York was recalled, and Beauchamp, Earl of

Warwick,[91] appointed in his place. But it was too late for any

one to check the advance of the French. That country was indeed

exhausted and miserable to the last degree; but England was in

little better plight. For several years the plague had been raging,

and an unusually bad harvest added to the horrors of disease. Bread

there was none, the people were reduced to live on pulse.

[Sidenote: Danger from Scotland.]

[Sidenote: James’s death.]

Moreover, the English forces were divided by the threatening

aspect of affairs in Scotland. The young King had done his best to

keep his promise of peace, but found it impossible to break off

the long-standing connection with France. In 1428, his daughter

Margaret had been betrothed to Charles VII.’s son, Louis of Anjou.

This had excited the fears of the English, and in the following

year, the Bishop of Winchester, under the plea of collecting

help for his proposed crusade against the Hussites, had visited

Edinburgh. A marriage treaty had even been proposed between the

two countries, but it came to nothing, and a vigorous diplomatic

struggle was still being carried on between the rival parties of

France and England, when, in 1434, the folly of Sir Robert Ogle,

who led a raid into the Scotch Lowlands, turned the scale in favour

of the French. The marriage between Margaret and Louis of Anjou

was at once carried out, and, in 1436, an army, with King James at

its head, attacked Roxburgh. Fortunately for England, the Scotch

King, bred at the Court of Henry V., and eager to introduce into

his own kingdom the orderly constitution he had known in England,

had excited the anger of his nobles. News of a conspiracy reached

him, and he withdrew from his invasion only to fall a victim to

that conspiracy in the following year. Weakened by these domestic

confusions, Scotland was content to enter into a truce for ten

years.

[Sidenote: Peace party procure the liberation of Orleans. 1440.]

Neither the suffering of the people, nor the danger from Scotland,

nor the constant want of success abroad, had any influence on

the passionate obstinacy of Gloucester. Meetings with regard to

peace were in vain held at Paris, the English refused to recede

from their demands. At length, however, Cardinal Beaufort and the

peace party so far prevailed, that, after the fall of Meaux, they

procured the liberation of the Duke of Orleans, hoping to find

in him an efficient mediator. As a protest against the measure,

while the Duke was taking the oaths required of him before his

liberation, Gloucester, refusing to be present, betook himself to

his barge and remained upon the river. The measure did not produce

the desired effect. The Duke of Warwick had died in May 1439.

Somerset, who had succeeded him, retook Harfleur, but, in the two

following years, not only did the French successes increase in

Normandy, even Guienne was in its turn assaulted. All efforts to

save it were in vain, and it became quite evident that the policy

of peace was the only one which could extricate England with honour

from its disastrous situation.

[Sidenote: Peace becomes necessary. Rise of Suffolk.]

[Sidenote: Marriage of Henry with Margaret of Anjou.]

[Sidenote: Pre-eminence of Suffolk.]

The death of Bedford had left Cardinal Beaufort at the head of

the party who desired a reasonable peace. But Beaufort was old,

and the influence of Gloucester, as first Prince of the blood and

the leader of the popular party, kept him much aloof from public

business. In his place there arose a new minister, De la Pole,

Earl of Suffolk. This man, a descendant of a wealthy merchant in

the reign of Edward III., and grandson of the favourite of Richard

II., was fully engaged upon the side of the Lancastrian dynasty.

He had been taken prisoner after the siege of Orleans, and had in

France formed connections which pointed him out as a fitting person

to manage negotiations with that country. It was determined, if

possible, to make the marriage of the young King with a French

Princess the basis of a peace. The Princess fixed on was Margaret,

the daughter of Réné, Duke of Bar, representative of the Angevin

house, the titular King of Sicily and of Jerusalem.[92] Suffolk

undertook to manage the delicate negotiation, although conscious,

it would seem, of the obloquy he would probably meet with. He

succeeded in obtaining an armistice to extend from June 1444 till

April 1446, and the marriage treaty was completed; but so far from

receiving a dower with his wife, as might have been expected, (but

which her father, who had surrendered his duchy to the Duke of

Burgundy, was quite unable to give,) it was arranged that Henry

should surrender to the French, as the price of their consent, all

that was left to the English of Anjou and Maine, where the war was

still being carried on. In carrying out this arrangement, Suffolk

had the consent of the Privy Council, but it is probable that

they did not contemplate so complete a cession of English rights.

His successful return secured him the title of Marquis, and the

friendship of the young Queen (whose masculine mind soon got entire

command of her husband’s will), and enabled him to hold a position

of complete superiority in the English councils.

[Sidenote: Gloucester’s death.]

Alliance with the French, on the somewhat disgraceful terms on

which it had been contracted, not unnaturally raised the anger of

Gloucester and his party. The rivalry grew hot between him and

Suffolk. There were probably private causes of trouble between

them, but at all events, in 1447, the Parliament was held at Bury

St. Edmunds, and Gloucester was summoned thither. He went with a

considerable following, but does not seem to have suspected danger,

although he found the town fortified, and the guards everywhere

doubled. He was suddenly apprehended on the charge of high treason,

and before any trial was granted him, the public were told that he

was dead. A death so opportune for his enemies naturally excited

suspicion, and the most sinister rumours of foul play were spread

among the people. It is impossible not to join in these suspicions;

at the same time it is fair to notice that at a late examination

his physician had declared his constitution radically unsound, and

that some contemporary writers mention his death as having arisen

from natural causes.

[Sidenote: York takes his place.]

His death left room for Richard Duke of York’s appearance upon the

stage of politics. The son of Anne, sister of the Earl of March,

and of that Duke of Cambridge who was put to death for his share in

the conspiracy immediately preceding Henry V.’s first expedition

to France, he stepped naturally into the place of leader of the

Plantagenet Princes. Ever since that family ascended the throne,

those branches of it which had not been actually reigning had

been for the most part in opposition. Till their accession, the

Lancastrians had been the leaders of this party; their place was

now taken first by Gloucester, then by York. It will be seen in the

sequel that those same families which had formed the discontented

party in the reign of Richard II., and in opposition to the

Lancastrians, now sided chiefly with York. He had been already

employed in public affairs, had been twice governor of Normandy,

and in that capacity had quarrelled with the Duke of Somerset, who

had been joined with him in command. To rid himself of so important

an enemy, Suffolk, the leading statesman of the ruling party, had

got him appointed in 1446 to the government of Ireland. This was a

post of considerable difficulty; for under the management of the

Earls of Ormond, one of the old Anglo-Irish settlers, that country

had fallen into great disorder.[93]

[Sidenote: Absolute ministry of Suffolk.]

[Sidenote: His unpopularity.]

After Gloucester’s death Suffolk had become unquestioned chief

Minister, for Cardinal Beaufort had not long survived his nephew.

He took upon himself all the unpopularity which the Lancastrian

dynasty had latterly earned. It is plain that among the people

there was deep-seated discontent. The persecution of the Lollards

had never relented. Frequent executions are recorded for heresy.

The support the Lancastrians had constantly given to the Church

had even produced several outbreaks. In 1438, and again in 1443,

there had been uproars in several parts of England, directed

against the Catholic ecclesiastical foundations. Nor was this

unnatural. Amidst the misery and desolation caused by repeated

plagues and famines, and the expenditure both of men and money

incident upon a foreign war, the Church alone, represented by the

wealthy Cardinal Beaufort, had retained its prosperity; while,

to crown all, national honour had been deeply wounded by want of

success in France. To this inherited unpopularity, Suffolk added

that which arose from the late dishonourable marriage treaty with

France. Instead of attempting to lessen the feeling against him,

he followed the common course of upstart ministers. The Princes

and great nobles found themselves excluded from the Council.

His ministers were chiefly bishops, especially Ascough, Bishop

of Salisbury, and De Moleyns, Bishop of Chichester, and men of

little eminence, as Lord Say. His government in fact resembled

that of Bernard of Armagnac in France, and took that particularly

objectionable form, the superiority of the lesser nobles.

[Sidenote: Renewal of the war.]

His foreign policy, too, was eminently unsuccessful. At the close

of the truce, in 1446, he had not secured any permanent peace; and

early in 1448, an ill-judged outbreak of some English auxiliaries,

who captured the town of Fougères, again plunged England into war.

John, Duke of Somerset, perhaps in despair at his ill success,

had killed himself. His brother Edmund succeeded to his title and

position in France. His opposition to the French, who attacked

him in great force, was entirely unavailing, and before the year

was over Rouen and a large part of Normandy had been regained by

the French. In May an armament under Sir Thomas Kyriel had been

defeated near Formigny; in July Caen surrendered; and in August

the last remnants of the English army returned to England from

Cherbourg. In the following year a last effort was made to retain

some position in Guienne with equally bad success.

[Sidenote: Fall of Rouen. 1449.]

[Sidenote: Popular outbreak against Suffolk.]

[Sidenote: Murder of Suffolk.]

The loss of Rouen, in 1449, brought the anger of the people to its

highest point. In an uproar they put to death De Moleyns, Bishop

of Chichester, at Portsmouth; and at length the House of Commons,

led by Tresham their speaker, insisted upon the apprehension of

Suffolk, who had now become a Duke, upon a charge of treason. On

the 7th of February eight charges were brought against him of a

somewhat indefinite character, especially charging him with a wish

to marry his son John to Margaret Beaufort, thus aiming at the

kingdom, and with gross mismanagement and treachery in France.

These were followed by sixteen more specific charges, in which

it was asserted that he had appropriated and misused the royal

revenues, interfered with the course of justice, and treated

treacherously with the French. On the 13th he appeared before the

King in the House of Peers. He denied most of the charges, and

excused himself on others on the ground that he had acted with

the approbation of the Privy Council. He however, declining the

privilege of his peerage and trial by the House of Lords, threw

himself entirely upon the King’s mercy; and Henry, hoping to get

over the difficulty without giving up his friend, without a trial

banished him for five years. This was a manifest breach of the

Constitution, and served only to increase the general discontent.

The Duke escaped privately to his own estates, and took sea at

Ipswich, but was met by an English squadron, taken on board the

largest ship, the “Nicholas of the Tower,” and after a sham trial

by the seamen, obliged to enter a little boat. He was there

beheaded, with a sort of parody of the usual forms of execution.

It is pretty evident that behind the popular anger there was the

influence of the Duke of York and other noblemen at work.

[Sidenote: Jack Cade.]

At the next Parliament, which was held at Leicester, many of

the nobles appeared in arms. At the same time the news of the

defeat of Kyriel at Formigny arrived; and at once the men of

Kent, who were probably in close alliance with the seamen who had

executed Suffolk, rose. Their leader was Jack Cade. He led the

insurgents under strict discipline towards London, assuming the

name of Mortimer, and we cannot but believe with the knowledge

of the Duke of York. Two papers were sent in to the Government;

one called the Complaints, the other the Demands, of the Commons

of Kent. In these were summed up the causes of the unpopularity

of Suffolk; and the restoration of Richard of York to favour was

demanded. Unable to hold their advanced position, the insurgents

fell back to Sevenoaks, but there they were successful against a

hasty attack by Sir Humphrey Stafford.[94] The King retired from

London, and so far yielded as to order the apprehension of Lord

Say, one of the obnoxious councillors. Cade then advanced, took

possession of Southwark, and appeared in London, under the title of

the Captain of Kent, and in the arms of Stafford. The burghers of

London, full of sympathy for the demands of the Kentish men, and

pleased with the strict discipline preserved, sided at first with

the insurgents. At a formal trial presided over by the Lord Mayor,

Say, who had fallen into the hands of the people, was condemned

and immediately executed. Meanwhile, almost at the same time,

Ascough, the obnoxious Bishop of Salisbury, was put to death by his

own followers at Eddington. Thus all the obnoxious ministers had

been got rid of. London was now in the hands of the populace. The

temptation was too strong for them, and some plundering took place.

On this the Londoners took fright, and, when the insurgents retired

for the night to Southwark, broke down and defended the bridge.

Cade, unable to regain London, fell back, and after his followers,

deceived by a promise of general pardon, had chiefly dispersed, was

pursued and put to death near Lewes by Iden the sheriff.

[Sidenote: Continued discontent.]

[Sidenote: York’s appearance in arms. 1452.]

The disaffection was by no means quieted. Complaints were bitter,

that by repeated prorogations of Parliament supplies were obtained

without any redress of grievances, and that the bishops and

clergy sided with the oppressors. While public feeling was in

this irritable condition, York, suddenly leaving his government

of Ireland without leave, appeared on the Welsh border with 4000

of his vassals. In this threatening manner, and accompanied by

the Duke of Norfolk, the Earls of Devonshire and Salisbury, the

whole clan of the Nevilles, and the Lords Cromwell[95] and Cobham,

he appeared at Westminster. Meanwhile, Somerset, the acknowledged

head of the rival party, returned from France, and received the

office of Constable. The parties were assuming form, and a crisis

was evidently at hand. York made a formal demand for the dismissal

of Somerset and the punishment of the Duchess of Suffolk. As yet,

however, the Government was strong enough to refuse these demands,

and during the whole of the year 1451, without any public acts, the

quarrel was becoming more embittered. In Devonshire Lord Bonville

was at open war with the Earl of Devonshire. In the North, Percy,

Lord Egremont, was fighting with the Earl of Salisbury. And in the

winter, the Welsh vassals of York were gathered round the castle of

Ludlow. Hitherto York and his partisans had persistently declared

themselves the faithful servants of the Crown, interested only in

the removal of the King’s bad ministers. None the less, in the

beginning of the year 1452, Somerset and the King marched into

the West, where York had been collecting his vassals, while York,

moving in the opposite direction, passed the royal troops, and

appeared in Kent, where he felt sure of support.

[Sidenote: He is duped into submission.]

This summoned the King back towards London; he took up his position

at Blackheath, and there received the demands of York, to which

he consented, promising to imprison Somerset, and to form a new

council. Trusting to this promise, York disbanded his army, and

went to have an interview with the King. He there discovered, to

his dismay, that he had been deceived. His rival was in the tent,

and evidently still in favour. Hot words were exchanged, but

ultimately York was compelled to renew his oath of loyalty, and

the Somerset party for the instant triumphed. The next Parliament

was strongly in their favour; the speaker, Thomas Thorpe, a strong

partisan of the Lancastrians. The King’s half-brothers, the sons

of Owen Tudor, (Edmund, Earl of Richmond, and Jasper, Earl of

Pembroke,) were brought prominently forward as members of the

royal house, and Cardinal Kemp, now Archbishop of Canterbury and

Chancellor, declared that the Government would enforce peace by

arms if necessary.

[Sidenote: Imbecility of the King. Prince of Wales born. 1454.]

[Sidenote: York’s first Protectorate.]

This triumph was of short duration. News arrived of the failure

of the new expedition for the rescue of Guienne, and of the

death of Talbot, Lord Shrewsbury, its leader, at Castillon. And

worse than that, the King, who had all his life suffered both

from bodily and intellectual weakness, fell into a condition of

hopeless imbecility. Under these circumstances, the birth of a

Prince called Edward, which might have added to the strength of

the Lancastrian party, was but a source of weakness. York, as heir

presumptive to the throne of a sickly monarch, might have been

contented to wait; the birth of a new heir apparent urged him to

do what he had to do quickly. The opportunity, too, now offered

itself; during the imbecility of the King, some regent was wanted;

there was no excuse for passing over York. An instant change of

government was the consequence. Somerset was apprehended. Even

the Parliament chosen under the Lancastrian influence could not

refuse, after it had obtained proof of Henry’s folly, to appoint

Richard. The amount of authority given him seems to have been

exactly that which Gloucester had enjoyed. He was President of the

Council, and chief executive officer. His office was terminable

at the royal will. Though thus limited, his power was sufficient

to enable him to change the constitution of the Council, to carry

through a breach of Parliamentary privilege by imprisoning for a

debt Thorpe the speaker, and on the death of Cardinal Kemp, to

appoint his brother-in-law Richard Neville, Earl of Salisbury, to

the chancellorship.

[Sidenote: Recovery of the King. 1454.]

[Sidenote: York again appears In arms.]

[Sidenote: First battle of St. Albans. May 22, 1455.]

A History of England, Period I. Mediæval Monarchy · 第 36 / 44 段