[Illustration: 1-432-mary.jpg MARY]
MARY.
{1553.} The title of the princess Mary, after the demise of her brother,
was not exposed to any considerable difficulty; and the objections
started by the lady Jane’s partisans were new and unheard of by the
nation. Though all the Protestants, and even many of the Catholics,
believed the marriage of Henry VIII. with Catharine of Arragon to be
unlawful and invalid; yet, as it had been contracted by the parties
without any criminal intention, had been avowed by their parents,
recognized by the nation, and seemingly founded on those principles of
law and religion which then prevailed, few imagined that their issue
ought on that account to be regarded as illegitimate. A declaration
to that purpose had indeed been extorted from parliament by the usual
violence and caprice of Henry; but as that monarch had afterwards been
induced to restore his daughter to the right of succession, her title
was now become as legal and parliamentary as it was ever esteemed just
and natural. The public had long been familiarized to these sentiments:
during all the reign of Edward, the princess was regarded as his
lawful successor; and though the Protestants dreaded the effects of
her prejudices, the extreme hatred universally entertained against the
Dudleys,[*] who, men foresaw, would, under the name of Jane, be the real
sovereigns, was more than sufficient to counterbalance, even with that
party, the attachment to religion.
* Sleidan, lib. xxv.
This last attempt to violate the order of succession had displayed
Northumberland’s ambition and injustice in a full light; and when the
people reflected on the long train of fraud, iniquity, and cruelty,
by which that project had been conducted; that the lives of the two
Seymours, as well as the title of the princesses, had been sacrificed to
it; they were moved by indignation to exert themselves in opposition
to such criminal enterprises. The general veneration also paid to the
memory of Henry VIII. prompted the nation to defend the rights of
his posterity; and the miseries of the ancient civil wars were not
so entirely forgotten, that men were willing, by a departure from the
lawful heir, to incur the danger of like bloodshed and confusion.
Northumberland, sensible of the opposition which he must expect, had
carefully concealed the destination made by the king; and in order to
bring the two princesses into his power, he had had the precaution to
engage the council, before Edward’s death, to write to them in that
prince’s name, desiring their attendance, on pretence that his infirm
state of health required the assistance of their counsel and the
consolation of their company.[*] Edward expired before their arrival;
but Northumberland, in order to make the princesses fall into the
snare, kept the king’s death still secret; and the lady Mary had already
reached Hoddesden, within half a day’s journey of the court. Happily,
the earl of Arundel sent her private intelligence, both of her brother’s
death, and of the conspiracy formed against her;[**] she immediately
made haste to retire; and she arrived, by quick journeys, first at
Kenning Hall in Norfolk, then at Framlingham in Suffolk; where she
purposed to embark and escape to Flanders, in case she should find it
impossible to defend her right of succession. She wrote letters to
the nobility and most considerable gentry in every county in England;
commanding them to assist her in the defence of her crown and person.
And she despatched a message to the council; by which she notified to
them, that her brother’s death was no longer a secret to her, promised
them pardon for past offences, and required them immediately to give
orders for proclaiming her in London.[***]
* Heylin, p. 154.
** Burnet, vol. ii. p. 233.
*** Fox, vol. iii, p. 14.
Northumberland found that further dissimulation was fruitless: he
went to Sion House,[*] accompanied by the duke of Suffolk, the earl of
Pembroke, and others of the nobility; and he approached the lady Jane,
who resided there, with all the respect usually paid to the sovereign.
Jane was in a great measure ignorant of these transactions; and it
was with equal grief and surprise that she received intelligence of
them.[**] She was a lady of an amiable person, an engaging disposition,
accomplished parts; and being of an equal age with the late king, she
had received all her education with him, and seemed even to possess
greater facility in acquiring every part of manly and polite literature.
She had attained a familiar knowledge of the Roman and Greek languages,
besides modern tongues; had passed most of her time in an application to
learning; and expressed a great indifference for other occupations and
amusements usual with her sex and station. Roger Ascham, tutor to the
lady Elizabeth, having one day paid her a visit, found her employed in
reading Plato, while the rest of the family were engaged in a party of
hunting in the park; and on his admiring the singularity of her choice,
she told him, that she received more pleasure from that author than the
others could reap from all their sport and gayety.[***] Her heart, full
of this passion for literature and the elegant arts, and of tenderness
towards her husband, who was deserving of her affections, had never
opened itself to the flattering allurements of ambition; and the
intelligence of her elevation to the throne was nowise agreeable to her.
She even refused to accept of the present; pleaded the preferable title
of the two princesses; expressed her dread of the consequences attending
an enterprise so dangerous, not to say so criminal; and desired to
remain in the private station in which she was born.
* Thuanus, lib. xiii. c. 10.
** Godwin in Kennet, p. 329. Heylin, p. 149. Burnet, vol.
ii. p. 234.
*** Ascham’s Works, p. 222, 223.
Overcome at last by the entreaties, rather than the reasons, of her
father and father-in-law, and above all of her husband, she submitted to
their will, and was prevailed on to relinquish her own judgment. It was
then usual for the kings of England, after their accession, to pass the
first days in the Tower; and Northumberland immediately conveyed thither
the new sovereign. All the counsellors were obliged to attend her to
that fortress; and by this means became, in reality, prisoners in the
hands of Northumberland, whose will they were necessitated to obey.
Orders were given by the council to proclaim Jane throughout the
kingdom; but these orders were executed only in London and the
neighborhood. No applause ensued: the people heard the proclamation with
silence and concern: some even expressed their scorn and contempt; and
one Pot, a vintner’s apprentice, was severely punished for this offence.
The Protestant teachers themselves, who were employed to convince the
people of Jane’s title, found their eloquence fruitless; and Ridley,
bishop of London, who preached a sermon to that purpose, wrought no
effect upon his audience.
The people of Suffolk, meanwhile, paid their attendance on Mary. As they
were much attached to the reformed communion, they could not forbear,
amidst their tenders of duty, expressing apprehensions for their
religion; but when she assured them that she never meant to change the
laws of Edward, they enlisted themselves in her cause with zeal and
affection. The nobility and gentry daily flocked to her, and brought
her reënforcement. The earls of Bath and Sussex, the eldest sons of Lord
Wharton and Lord Mordaunt, Sir William Drury, Sir Henry Benningfield,
Sir Henry Jernegan, persons whose interest lay in the neighborhood,
appeared at the head of their tenants and retainers.[*] Sir Edward
Hastings, brother to the earl of Huntingdon, having received a
commission from the council to make levies for the lady Jane in
Buckinghamshire, carried over his troops, which amounted to four
thousand men, and joined Mary. Even a fleet which had been sent by
Northumberland to lie off the coast of Suffolk, being forced into
Yarmouth by a storm, was engaged to declare for that princess.
Northumberland, hitherto blinded by ambition, saw at last the danger
gather round him, and knew not to what hand to turn himself. He had
levied forces, which were assembled at London; but dreading the cabals
of the courtiers and counsellors, whose compliance, he knew, had been
entirely the result of fear or artifice, he was resolved to keep near
the person of the lady Jane, and send Suffolk to command the army. But
the counsellors, who wished to remove him,[**] working on the filial
tenderness of Jane, magnified to her the danger to which her father
would be exposed; and represented that Northumberland, who had gained
reputation by formerly suppressing a rebellion in those parts, was more
proper to command in that enterprise.
* Heylin, p. 160. Burnet, vol. ii. p. 237.
** Godwin, p. 330. Heylin, p. 159. Burnet vol. ii. p. 239.
Fox, vol. iii. p 15.
The duke himself, who knew the slender capacity of Suffolk, began to
think that none but himself was able to encounter the present danger;
and he agreed to take on him the command of the troops. The counsellors
attended on him at his departure with the highest protestations of
attachment, and none more than Arundel, his mortal enemy.[*] As he went
along, he remarked the disaffection of the people, which foreboded a
fatal issue to his ambitious hopes. “Many,” said he to Lord Gray, “come
out to look at us, but I find not one who cries, God speed you!”[**]
The duke had no sooner reached St. Edmondsbury, than he found his
army, which did not exceed six thousand men, too weak to encounter
the queen’s,[***] which amounted to double the number. He wrote to the
council, desiring them to send him a reënforcement; and the counsellors
immediately laid hold of the opportunity to free themselves from
confinement. They left the Tower, as if they meant to execute
Northumberland’s commands; but being assembled in Baynard’s castle, a
house belonging to Pembroke, they deliberated concerning the method
of shaking off his usurped tyranny. Arundel began the conference,
by representing the injustice and cruelty of Northumberland, the
exorbitancy of his ambition, the criminal enterprise which he had
projected, and the guilt in which he had involved the whole council;
and he affirmed, that the only method of making atonement for their past
offences, was by a speedy return to the duty which they owed to their
lawful sovereign.[****] This motion was seconded by Pembroke, who,
clapping his hand to his sword, swore he was ready to fight any man that
expressed himself of a contrary sentiment. The mayor and aldermen of
London were immediately sent for, who discovered great alacrity in
obeying the orders they received to proclaim Mary. The people expressed
their approbation by shouts of applause. Even Suffolk, who commanded in
the Tower, finding resistance fruitless, opened the gates, and declared
for the queen. The lady Jane, after the vain pageantry of wearing a
crown during ten days, returned to a private life with more satisfaction
than she felt when the royalty was tendered to her:[v] and the
messengers who were sent to Northumberland with orders to lay down his
arms, found that he had despaired of success, was deserted by all his
followers, and had already proclaimed the queen, with exterior marks
of joy and satisfaction.[v*] The people every where, on the queen’s
approach to London, gave sensible expressions of their loyalty and
attachment; and the lady Elizabeth met her at the head of a thousand
horse, which that princess had levied in order to support their joint
title against the usurper.[v**]
* Heylin, p. 161. Baker, p. 315. Holingshed, p. 1086.
** Speed, p. 816.
*** Godwin, p. 331.
**** Godwin, p. 331, 332. Thuanus, lib. xiii.
v Godwin, p. 332. Thuanus, lib. xiii. c. 2
v* Stowe, p. 612.
v** Burnet, vol. ii. p. 240. Heylin, p. 19. Stowe, p. 613.
The queen gave orders for taking into custody the duke of
Northumberland, who fell on his knees to the earl of Arundel, that
arrested him, and abjectly begged his life.[*] At the same time were
committed the earl of Warwick, his eldest son, Lord Ambrose and Lord
Henry Dudley, two of his younger sons, Sir Andrew Dudley, his brother,
the marquis of Northampton, the earl of Huntingdon, Sir Thomas Palmer,
and Sir John Gates. The queen afterwards confined the duke of Suffolk,
Lady Jane Gray, and Lord Guildford Dudley. But Mary was desirous, in
the beginning of her reign, to acquire popularity by the appearance of
clemency; and because the counsellors pleaded constraint as an excuse
for their treason, she extended her pardon to most of them. Suffolk
himself recovered his liberty; and he owed this indulgence, in a great
measure, to the contempt entertained of his capacity. But the guilt of
Northumberland was too great, as well as his ambition and courage too
dangerous, to permit him to entertain any reasonable hopes of life. When
brought to his trial, he only desired permission to ask two questions of
the peers appointed to sit on his jury; whether a man could be guilty
of treason that obeyed orders given him by the council under the great
seal; and whether those who were involved in the same guilt with himself
could sit as his judges. Being told that the great seal of a usurper was
no authority, and that persons not lying under any sentence of attainder
were still innocent in the eye of the law, and might be admitted on any
jury,[**] he acquiesced, and pleaded guilty. At his execution, he made
profession of the Catholic religion, and told the people that they
never would enjoy tranquillity till they returned to the faith of their
ancestors: whether that such were his real sentiments, which he had
formerly disguised from interest and ambition, or that he hoped by this
declaration to render the queen more favorable to his family.[***] Sir
Thomas Palmer and Sir John Gates suffered with him; and this was all
the blood spilled on account of so dangerous and criminal an enterprise
against the rights of the sovereign. Sentence was pronounced against
the lady Jane and Lord Guildford, but without any present intention of
putting it in execution. The youth and innocence of the persons, neither
of whom had reached their seventeenth year, pleaded sufficiently in
their favor.
* Burnet, vol. ii. p. 239. Stowe, p. 612. Baker, p. 315.
Holingshed, p. 1088.
** Burnet, vol. ii. p. 243. Heylin, p. 18. Baker, p. 316.
Holingshed, p. 1089.
*** Heylin, p. 19. Burnet. vol. iii. p. 243. Stowe, p. 614.
When Mary first arrived in the Tower, the duke of Norfolk, who had
been detained prisoner during all the last reign, Courtney, son of the
marquis of Exeter, who, without being charged with any crime, had been
subjected to the same punishment ever since his father’s attainder;
Gardiner, Tonstal, and Bonner, who had been confined for their adhering
to the Catholic cause, appeared before her, and implored her clemency
and protection.[*] They were all of them restored to their liberty, and
immediately admitted to her confidence and favor. Norfolk’s attainder,
notwithstanding that it had passed in parliament, was represented as
null and invalid; because, among other informalities, no special matter
had been alleged against him, except wearing a coat of arms which he and
his ancestors, without giving any offence, had always made use of,
in the face of the court and of the whole nation. Courtney soon after
received the title of earl of Devonshire; and though educated in such
close confinement that he was altogether unacquainted with the world, he
soon acquired all the accomplishments of a courtier and a gentleman, and
made a considerable figure during the few years which he lived after he
recovered his liberty.[**] Besides performing all those popular acts,
which, though they only affected individuals, were very acceptable to
the nation, the queen endeavored to ingratiate herself with the public
by granting a general pardon, though with some exceptions, and by
remitting the subsidy voted to her brother by the last parliament.[***]
* Heylin, p. 20. Stowe, p. 613. Holingshed, p. 1088.
** Dépêches de Noailles, vol ii. p 246, 247.
*** Stowe, p. 616.
The joy arising from the succession of the lawful heir, and from the
gracious demeanor of the sovereign, hindered not the people from being
agitated with great anxiety concerning the state of religion; and as
the bulk of the nation inclined to the Protestant communion, the
apprehensions entertained concerning the principles and prejudices of
the new queen were pretty general. The legitimacy of Mary’s birth had
appeared to be somewhat connected with the papal authority; and that
princess being educated with her mother, had imbibed the strongest
attachment to the Catholic communion, and the highest aversion to those
new tenets, whence, she believed, all the misfortunes of her family
had originally sprung. The discouragements which she lay under from her
father, though at last they brought her to comply with his will, tended
still more to increase her disgust to the reformers; and the vexations
which the protector and the council gave her during Edward’s reign, had
no other effect than to confirm her further in her prejudices. Naturally
of a sour and obstinate temper, and irritated by contradiction and
misfortunes, she possessed all the qualities fitted to compose a bigot;
and her extreme ignorance rendered her utterly incapable of doubt in
her own belief, or of indulgence to the opinions of others. The nation,
therefore, had great reason to dread, not only the abolition, but the
persecution of the established religion from the zeal of Mary; and it
was not long ere she discovered her intentions.
Gardiner, Bonner, Tonstal, Day, Heath, and Vesey, were reinstated in
their sees, either by a direct act of power, or, what is nearly the
same, by the sentence of commissioners appointed to review their trial
and condemnation. Though the bishopric of Durham had been dissolved by
authority of parliament, the queen erected it anew by letters patent,
and replaced Tonstal in his regalities as well as in his revenue.
On pretence of discouraging controversy, she silenced, by an act of
prerogative, all the preachers throughout England, except such as should
obtain a particular license; and it was easy to foresee, that none but
Catholics would be favored with this privilege. Holgate, archbishop
of York, Coverdale, bishop of Exeter, Ridley of London, and Hooper of
Glocester, were thrown into prison; whither old Latimer also was sent
soon after. The zealous bishops and priests were encouraged in their
forwardness to revive the mass, though contrary to the present laws.
Judge Hales, who had discovered such constancy in defending the queen’s
title, lost all his merit by an opposition to those illegal practices;
and being committed to custody, was treated with such severity, that he
fell into frenzy, and killed himself. The men of Suffolk were browbeaten
because they presumed to plead the promise which the queen, when they
enlisted themselves in her service, had given them of maintaining the
reformed religion: one in particular was set in the pillory, because he
had been too peremptory in recalling to her memory the engagements which
she had taken on that occasion. And though the queen still promised in
a public declaration before the council, to tolerate those who differed
from her; men foresaw that this engagement, like the former, would prove
but a feeble security when set in opposition to religious prejudices.
The merits of Cranmer towards the queen during the reign of Henry had
been considerable; and he had successfully employed his good offices
in mitigating the severe prejudices which that monarch had entertained
against her. But the active part which he had borne in promoting her
mother’s divorce, as well as in conducting the reformation, had made him
the object of her hatred; and though Gardiner had been equally forward
in soliciting and defending the divorce, he had afterwards made
sufficient atonement, by his sufferings in defence of the Catholic
cause. The primate, therefore, had reason to expect little favor during
the present reign; but it was by his own indiscreet zeal, that he
brought on himself the first violence and persecution. A report being
spread that Cranmer, in order to pay court to the queen, had promised
to officiate in the Latin service, the archbishop, to wipe off this
aspersion, published a manifesto in his own defence. Among other
expressions, he there said, that as the devil was a liar from the
beginning, and the father of lies, he had at this time stirred up his
servants to persecute Christ and his true religion: that this infernal
spirit now endeavored to restore the Latin satisfactory masses, a thing
of his own invention and device; and in order to effect his purpose, had
falsely made use of Cranmer’s name and authority: and that the mass is
not only without foundation, either in the Scriptures or in the practice
of the primitive church, but likewise discovers a plain contradiction
to antiquity and the inspired writings, and is besides replete with many
horrid blasphemies.[*]
* Fox, vol. iii. p. 94. Heylin, p. 25. Godwin, p. 336.
Burnet Vol. ii. Coll. No. 8. Cranm. Mem. p. 305. Thuanus,
lib xiii. c. 8.
On the publication of this inflammatory paper Cranmer was thrown into
prison, and was tried for the part which he had acted in concurring
with the lady Jane, and opposing the queen’s accession. Sentence of high
treason was pronounced against him, and though his guilt was shared with
the whole privy council and was even less than that of the greater part
of them, this sentence, however severe, must be allowed entirely legal.
The execution of it, however, did not follow; and Cranmer was reserved
for a more cruel punishment.
Peter Martyr, seeing a persecution gathering against the reformers
desired leave to withdraw;[*] and while some zealous Catholics moved
for his commitment, Gardiner both pleaded that he had come over by
an invitation from the government, and generously furnished him with
supplies for his journey: but as bigoted zeal still increased, his
wife’s body, which had been interred at Oxford, was afterwards dug up
by public orders, and buried in a dunghill.[**] The bones of Bucer and
Fagius, two foreign reformers, were about the same time committed to the
flames at Cambridge.[***] John Alasco was first silenced, then ordered
to depart the kingdom with his congregation. The greater part of the
foreign Protestants followed him; and the nation thereby lost many
useful hands for arts and manufactures. Several English Protestants also
took shelter in foreign parts; and every thing bore a dismal aspect for
the reformation.
During this revolution of the court, no protection was expected by
Protestants from the Parliament which was summoned to assemble. A
zealous reformer[****] pretends, that great violence and iniquity were
used in the elections; but, besides that the authority of this writer is
inconsiderable, that practice, as the necessities of government seldom
required it, had not hitherto been often employed in England. There
still remained such numbers devoted by opinion or affection to many
principles of the ancient religion, that the authority of the crown was
able to give such candidates the preference in most elections; and all
those who hesitated to comply with the court religion, rather declined
taking a seat, which, while it rendered them obnoxious to the queen,
could afterwards afford them no protection against the violence of
prerogative. It soon appeared, therefore, that a majority of the commons
would be obsequious to Mary’s designs; and as the peers were mostly
attached to the court from interest or expectations, little opposition
was expected from that quarter.
* Heylin, p. 26. Godwin, p. 336. Cranm. Mem. p. 317.
** Heylin, p. 26.
*** Saunders de Schism. Anglie.
**** Beale. But Fox, who lived at the time, and is very
minute in his narratives, says nothing of the matter. See
vol. iii. p. 16.
In opening the parliament, the court showed a contempt of the laws,
by celebrating, before the two houses, a mass of the Holy Ghost in the
Latin tongue, attended with all the ancient rites and ceremonies, though
abolished by act of parliament.[*] Taylor, bishop of Lincoln, having
refused to kneel at this service, was severely handled, and was
violently thrust out of the house.[**] The queen, however, still
retained the title of supreme head of the church of England; and it was
generally pretended, that the intention of the court was only to restore
religion to the same condition in which it had been left by Henry; but
that the other abuses of popery, which were the most grievous to the
nation, would never be revived.
The first bill passed by the parliament was of a popular nature, and
abolished every species of treason not contained in the statute of
Edward III., and every species of felony that did not subsist before the
first of Henry VIII.[***] The parliament next declared the queen to be
legitimate, ratified the marriage of Henry with Catharine of Arragon,
and annulled the divorce pronounced by Cranmer,[****] whom they greatly
blamed on that account. No mention, however, is made of the pope’s
authority, as any ground of the marriage. All the statutes of King
Edward with regard to religion were repealed by one vote.[v] The
attainder of the duke of Norfolk was reversed; and this act of justice
was more reasonable than the declaring of that attainder invalid without
further authority. Many clauses of the riot act, passed in the late
reign, were revived: a step which eluded in a great measure the popular
statute enacted at the first meeting of parliament.
* Fox, vol. iii. p. 19.
** Burnet, vol. ii. p. 252.
*** Mariæ, sess. i. cap. 1. By this repeal, though it was in
general popular, the clause of 5 and 6 Edward VI. cap. 11,
was lost, which required the confronting of two witnesses in
order to prove any treason.
**** Mariæ, sess. ii. cap. 1.
v Mariæ, sess. ii. cap. 1.
Notwithstanding the compliance of the two houses with the queen’s
inclinations, they had still a reserve in certain articles; and her
choice of a husband, in particular, was of such importance to national
interest, that they were determined not to submit tamely, in that
respect, to her will and pleasure. There were three marriages[*]
concerning which it was supposed that Mary had deliberated after her
accession. The first person proposed to her was Courtney, earl of
Devonshire, who, being an Englishman nearly allied to the crown, could
not fail of being acceptable to the nation; and as he was of an engaging
person and address, he had visibly gained on the queen’s affections,[**]
and hints were dropped him of her favorable dispositions towards
him.[***] But that nobleman neglected these overtures; and seemed rather
to attach himself to the lady Elizabeth, whose youth and agreeable
conversation he preferred to all the power and grandeur of her sister.
This choice occasioned a great coldness in Mary towards Devonshire;
and made her break out in a declared animosity against Elizabeth. The
ancient quarrel between their mothers had sunk deep into the malignant
heart of the queen; and after the declaration made by parliament
in favor of Catharine’s marriage, she wanted not a pretence for
representing the birth of her sister as illegitimate. The attachment of
Elizabeth to the reformed religion offended Mary’s bigotry; and as the
young princess had made some difficulty in disguising her sentiments,
violent menaces had been employed to bring her to compliance.[****] But
when the queen found that Elizabeth had obstructed her views in a point
which, perhaps, touched her still more nearly, her resentment, excited
by pride, no longer knew any bounds, and the princess was visibly
exposed to the greatest danger.[v]
Cardinal Pole, who had never taken priest’s orders, was another party
proposed to the queen; and there appeared many reasons to induce her to
make choice of this prelate. The high character of Pole for virtue and
humanity; the great regard paid him by the Catholic church, of which he
had nearly reached the highest dignity on the death of Paul III.;[v*]
the queen’s affection for the countess of Salisbury, his mother, who
had once been her governess; the violent animosity to which he had been
exposed on account of his attachment to the Romish communion; all these
considerations had a powerful influence on Mary. But the cardinal was
now in the decline of life; and having contracted habits of study and
retirement, he was represented to her as unqualified for the bustle of a
court and the hurry of business.[v**]
* Thuan. lib. ii. cap. 3.
** Dépêches de Noailles, vol. ii. p. 147, 163, 214, 215;
vol. iii. p. 27.
*** Godwin, p. 339.
**** Dep. de Noailles, vol. ii. passim.
v Heylin, p. 31. Burnet, vol. ii. p, 255.
v* Father Paul, book iii.
v** Heylin, p. 31.
The queen, therefore, dropped all thoughts of that alliance: but as
she entertained a great regard for Pole’s wisdom and virtue, she still
intended to reap the benefit of his counsel in the administration of her
government. She secretly entered into a negotiation with Commendone, an
agent of Cardinal Dandino, legate at Brussels; she sent assurances to
the pope, then Julius III, of her earnest desire to reconcile herself
and her kingdoms to the holy see; and she desired that Pole might be
appointed legate for the performance of that pious office.[*]
These two marriages being rejected, the queen cast her eye towards the
emperor’s family, from which her mother was descended, and which, during
her own distresses, had always afforded her countenance and protection.
Charles V., who a few years before was almost absolute master of
Germany, had exercised his power in such an arbitrary manner, that he
gave extreme disgust to the nation, who apprehended the total extinction
of their liberties from the encroachments of that monarch.[**] Religion
had served him as a pretence for his usurpations; and from the same
principle he met with that opposition which overthrew his grandeur, and
dashed all his ambitious hopes. Maurice, elector of Saxony, enraged that
the landgrave of Hesse, who, by his advice, and on his assurances, had
put himself into the emperor’s hands, should be unjustly detained a
prisoner, formed a secret conspiracy among the Protestant princes; and,
covering his intentions with the most artful disguises, he suddenly
marched his forces against Charles, and narrowly missed becoming master
of his person.
* Burnet, vol ii. p. 258.
** Thuanus. lib. iv. c. 17.
The Protestants flew to arms in every quarter; and their insurrection,
aided by an invasion from France, reduced the emperor to such
difficulties, that he was obliged to submit to terms of peace which
insured the independency of Germany. To retrieve his honor, he made an
attack on France; and laying siege to Metz with an army of a hundred
thousand men, he conducted the enterprise in person, and seemed
determined, at all hazards, to succeed in an undertaking which had fixed
the attention of Europe. But the duke of Guise, who defended Metz with
a garrison composed of the bravest nobility of France, exerted such
vigilance, conduct, and valor, that the siege was protracted to the
depth of winter; and the emperor found it dangerous to persevere any
longer. He retired with the remains of his army into the Low Countries,
much dejected with that reverse of fortune which in his declining years,
had so fatally overtaken him.
No sooner did Charles hear of the death of Edward, and the accession of
his kinswoman Mary to the crown of England, than he formed the scheme of
acquiring that kingdom to his family; and he hoped by this incident to
balance all the losses which he had sustained in Germany. His son Philip
was a widower; and though he was only twenty-seven years of age, eleven
years younger than the queen, this objection, it was thought, would be
overlooked, and there was no reason to despair of her still having a
numerous issue. The emperor, therefore, immediately sent over an agent
to signify his intentions to Mary; who, pleased with the support of so
powerful an alliance, and glad to unite herself more closely with
her mother’s family, to which she was ever strongly attached, readily
embraced the proposal. Norfolk, Arundel, and Paget, gave their advice
for the match: and Gardiner, who was become prime minister, and who
had been promoted to the office of chancellor, finding how Mary’s
inclinations lay, seconded the project of the Spanish alliance. At the
same time he represented, both to her and the emperor, the necessity of
stopping all further innovations in religion, till the completion of the
marriage. He observed, that the parliament amidst all their compliances
had discovered evident symptoms of jealousy, and seemed at present
determined to grant no further concessions in favor of the Catholic
religion: that though they might make a sacrifice to their sovereign of
some speculative principles which they did not well comprehend, or of
some rites which seemed not of any great moment, they had imbibed such
strong prejudices against the pretended usurpations and exactions of the
court of Rome, that they would with great difficulty be again brought
to submit to its authority: that the danger of resuming the abbey lands
would alarm the nobility and gentry, and induce them to encourage the
prepossessions, which were but too general among the people, against the
doctrine and worship of the Catholic church: that much pains had been
taken to prejudice the nation against the Spanish alliance; and if that
point were urged at the same time with further changes in religion, it
would hazard a general revolt and insurrection: that the marriage being
once completed would give authority to the queen’s measures, and enable
her afterwards to forward the pious work in which she was engaged: and
that it was even necessary previously to reconcile the people to
the marriage, by rendering the conditions extremely favorable to the
English, and such as would seem to insure to them their independency,
and the entire possession of their ancient laws and privileges.[*]
The emperor, well acquainted with the prudence and experience of
Gardiner, assented to all these reasons, and he endeavored to temper the
zeal of Mary, by representing the necessity of proceeding gradually in
the great work of converting the nation. Hearing that Cardinal Pole,
more sincere in his religious opinions, and less guided by the maxims
of human policy, after having sent contrary advice to the queen, had
set out on his journey to England, where he was to exercise his legatine
commission, he thought proper to stop him at Dillinghen, a town on the
Danube; and he afterwards obtained Mary’s consent for this detention.
The negotiation for the marriage meanwhile proceeded apace; and Mary’s
intentions of espousing Philip became generally known to the nation.
The commons, who hoped that they had gained the queen by the concessions
which they had already made, were alarmed to hear that she was resolved
to contract a foreign alliance; and they sent a committee to remonstrate
in strong terms against that dangerous measure. To prevent further
applications of the same kind, she thought proper to dissolve the
parliament.
A convocation had been summoned at the same time with the parliament;
and the majority here also appeared to be of the court religion. An
offer was very frankly made by the Romanists, to dispute concerning
the points controverted between the two communions; and as
transubstantiation was the article which of all others they deemed the
clearest, and founded on the most irresistible arguments, they chose to
try their strength by defending it. The Protestants pushed the dispute
as far as the clamor and noise of their antagonists would permit; and
they fondly imagined that they had obtained some advantage, when, in the
course of the debate, they obliged the Catholics to avow that, according
to their doctrine, Christ had in his last supper held himself in his
hand, and had swallowed and eaten himself.[**]
* Burnet, vol. ii. p. 261.
** Collier, vol. ii. p. 356.
This triumph, however, was confined only to their own party: the
Romanists maintained, that their champions had clearly the better of
the day, that their adversaries were blind and obstinate heretics; that
nothing but the most extreme depravity of heart could induce men to
contest such self-evident principles; and that the severest punishments
were due to their perverse wickedness. So pleased were they with their
superiority in this favorite point, that they soon after renewed the
dispute at Oxford; and, to show that they feared no force of learning or
abilities, where reason was so evident on their side, they sent thither
Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley, under a guard, to try whether these
renowned controversialists could find any appearance of argument to
defend their baffled principles.[*] The issue of the debate was very
different from what it appeared to be a few years before, in a famous
conference held at the same place during the reign of Edward.
{1554.} After the parliament and convocation were dismissed, the new
laws with regard to religion, though they had been anticipated in most
places by the zeal of the Catholics, countenanced by government,
were still more openly put in execution: the mass was every where
reëstablished; and marriage was declared to be incompatible with any
spiritual office. It has been asserted by some writers, that three
fourths of the clergy were at this time deprived of their livings;
though other historians, more accurate,[**] have estimated the number
of sufferers to be far short of this proportion. A visitation was
appointed, in order to restore more perfectly the mass and the ancient
rites. Among other articles, the commissioners were enjoined to forbid
the oath of supremacy to be taken by the clergy on their receiving any
benefice.[***] It is to be observed, that this oath had been established
by the laws of Henry VIII., which were still in force.
* Mem. Cranm. p. 354. Heylin, p. 50.
** Harmer, p. 138.
*** Collier, vol. ii. p. 364. Fox, vol. iii. p. 38. Heylin,
p. 35. Sleiden, lib. xxv.
This violent and sudden change of religion inspired the Protestants with
great discontent; and even affected indifferent spectators with concern,
by the hardships to which so many individuals were on that account
exposed. But the Spanish match was a point of more general concern, and
diffused universal apprehension for the liberty and independence of the
nation. To obviate all clamor, the articles of marriage were drawn as
favorable as possible for the interests and security, and even grandeur
of England. It was agreed, that though Philip should have the title
of king, the administration should be entirely in the queen; that no
foreigner should be capable of enjoying any office in the kingdom;
that no innovation should be made in the English laws, customs, and
privileges; that Philip should not carry the queen abroad without her
consent, nor any of her children without the consent of the nobility;
that sixty thousand pounds a year should be settled as her jointure;
that the male issue of this marriage should inherit, together with
England, both Burgundy and the Low Countries; and that if Don Carlos,
Philip’s son by his former marriage, should die, and his line be
extinct, the queen’s issue, whether male or female, should inherit
Spain, Sicily, Milan, and all the other dominions of Philip.[*] Such
was the treaty of marriage signed by Count Egmont and three other
ambassadors, sent over to England by the emperor.[**]
These articles, when published, gave no satisfaction to the nation. It
was universally said, that the emperor, in order to get possession of
England, would verbally agree to any terms and the greater advantage
there appeared in the conditions which he granted, the more certainly
might it be concluded that he had no serious intention of observing
them: that the usual fraud and ambition of that monarch might assure the
nation of such a conduct: and his son Philip, while he inherited these
vices from his father, added to them tyranny, sullenness, pride, and
barbarity, more dangerous vices of his own: that England would become a
province, and a province to a kingdom which usually exercised the
most violent authority over all her dependent dominions: that the
Netherlands, Milan, Sicily, Naples, groaned under the burden of Spanish
tyranny; and throughout all the new conquests in America there had been
displayed scenes of unrelenting cruelty, hitherto unknown in the
history of mankind: that the inquisition was a tribunal invented by that
tyrannical nation, and would infallibly, with all their other laws
and institutions, be introduced into England; and that the divided
sentiments of the people with regard to religion would subject
multitudes to this iniquitous tribunal, and would reduce the whole
nation to the most abject servitude.[***]
* Rymer, vol. xv. p. 377.
** Dépêches de Noailles, vol. ii. p. 299.
*** Heylin p. 32. Burnet, vol. ii. p. 268. Godwin, p. 339.
These complaints being diffused every where, prepared the people for a
rebellion; and had any foreign power given them encouragement, or any
great man appeared to head them, the consequence might have proved fatal
to the queen’s authority. But the king of France, though engaged in
hostilities with the emperor, refused to concur in any proposal for an
insurrection, lest he should afford Mary a pretence for declaring war
against him.[*] And the more prudent part of the nobility thought that,
as the evils of the Spanish alliance were only dreaded at a distance,
matters were not yet fully prepared for a general revolt. Some persons,
however, more turbulent than the rest, believed that it would be safer
to prevent than to redress grievances; and they formed a conspiracy to
rise in arms, and declare against the queen’s marriage with Philip. Sir
Thomas Wiat purposed to raise Kent; Sir Peter Carew, Devonshire; and
they engaged the duke of Suffolk, by the hopes of recovering the crown
for the lady Jane, to attempt raising the midland counties.[**] Carew’s
impatience or apprehensions engaged him to break the concert, and to
rise in arms before the day appointed. He was soon suppressed by
the earl of Bedford, and constrained to fly into France. On this
intelligence, Suffolk, dreading an arrest, suddenly left the town with
his brothers, Lord Thomas and Lord Leonard Gray, and endeavored to raise
the people in the counties of Warwick and Leicester, where his interest
lay; but he was so closely pursued by the earl of Huntingdon, at
the head of three hundred horse, that he was obliged to disperse his
followers, and being discovered in his concealment, he was carried
prisoner to London.[***]
* Dépêches de Noailles, vol. ii. p. 249; vol. iii. p. 17,
58.
** Heylin, p. 33. Godwin, p. 340.
*** Fox, vol. iii. p. 30.
Wiat was at first more successful in his attempt; and having published a
declaration, at Maidstone in Kent, against the queen’s evil counsellors,
and against the Spanish match, without any mention of religion, the
people began to flock to his standard. The duke of Norfolk, with Sir
Henry Jernegan, was sent against him, at the head of the guards and some
other troops, reënforced with five hundred Londoners commanded by Bret:
and he came within sight of the rebels at Rochester, where they had
fixed their head-quarters. Sir George Harper here pretended to desert
from them; but having secretly gained Bret, these two malecontents so
wrought on the Londoners, that the whole body deserted to Wiat, and
declared that they would not contribute to enslave their native country.
Norfolk, dreading the contagion of the example, immediately retreated
with his troops, and took shelter in the city.[*]
After this proof of the disposition of the people, especially of the
Londoners, who were mostly Protestants, Wiat was encouraged to proceed;
he led his forces to Southwark, where he required of the queen that she
should put the Tower into his hands, should deliver four counsellors
as hostages, and in order to insure the liberty of the nation, should
immediately marry an Englishman. Finding that the bridge was secured
against him, and that the city was overawed, he marched up to Kingston,
where he passed the river with four thousand men; and returning towards
London, hoped to encourage his partisans who had engaged to declare for
him. He had imprudently wasted so much time at Southwark, and in his
march from Kingston, that the critical season, on which all popular
commotions depend, was entirely lost: though he entered Westminster
without resistance, his followers, finding that no person of note joined
him, insensibly fell off, and he was at last seized near Temple Bar by
Sir Maurice Berkeley.[**] Four hundred persons are said to have suffered
for this rebellion:[***] four hundred more were conducted before the
queen with ropes about their necks: and falling on their knees, received
a pardon, and were dismissed. Wiat was condemned and executed: as it
had been reported that, on his examination, he had accused the lady
Elizabeth and the earl of Devonshire as accomplices, he took care, on
the scaffold, before the whole people, fully to acquit them of having
any share in his rebellion.
* Heylin, p. 33. Godwin, p. 341. Stowe, p. 619. Baker, p.
318. Holingshed, p. 1094.
** Fox, vol. iii. p. 31. Heylin, p. 34. Burnet, vol. ii. p.
270. Stowe, p. 621.
*** Dépêches de Noailles, vol. iii. p. 124.
The lady Elizabeth had been, during some time, treated with great
harshness by her sister; and many studied instances of discouragement
and disrespect had been practised against her. She was ordered to take
place at court after the countess of Lenox and the duchess of Suffolk,
as if she were not legitimate:[*] her friends were discountenanced on
every occasion: and while her virtues, which were now become eminent,
drew to her the attendance of all the young nobility, and rendered
her the favorite of the nation;[**] the malevolence of the queen still
discovered itself every day by fresh symptoms, and obliged the princess
to retire into the country. Mary seized the opportunity of this
rebellion; and hoping to involve her sister in some appearance of guilt,
sent for her under a strong guard, committed her to the Tower, and
ordered her to be strictly examined by the council. But the public
declaration made by Wiat rendered it impracticable to employ against her
any false evidence which might have offered; and the princess made
so good a defence, that the queen found herself under a necessity of
releasing her.[***] In order to send her out of the kingdom, a marriage
was offered her with the duke of Savoy; and when she declined the
proposal, she was committed to custody under a strong guard at
Wodestoke.[****] The earl of Devonshire, though equally innocent, was
confined in Fotheringay Castle.
But this rebellion proved still more fatal to the lady Jane Gray, as
well as to her husband: the duke of Suffolk’s guilt was imputed to her;
and though the rebels and malecontents seemed chiefly to rest their
hopes on the lady Elizabeth and the earl of Devonshire, the queen,
incapable of generosity or clemency, determined to remove every person
from whom the least danger could be apprehended. Warning was given the
lady Jane to prepare for death; a doom which she had long expected, and
which the innocence of her life, as well as the misfortunes to which she
had been exposed, rendered nowise unwelcome to her. The queen’s zeal,
under color of tender mercy to the prisoner’s soul, induced her to
send divines, who harassed her with perpetual disputation; and even
a reprieve for three days was granted her, in hopes that she would be
persuaded during that time to pay, by a timely conversion, some regard
to her eternal welfare. The lady Jane had presence of mind, in those
melancholy circumstances, not only to defend her religion by all the
topics then in use, but also to write a letter to her sister[v] in the
Greek language; in which, besides sending her a copy of the Scriptures
in that tongue, she exhorted her to maintain, in every fortune, a like
steady perseverance.
* Dépêches de Noailles, vol. ii. p. 273, 288.
** Dépêches de Noailles, vol. iii. p. 273.
*** Godwin, p. 343. Burnet, vol. ii. p. 273. Fox, vol. ii.
p. 99, 105. Strype’s Mem. vol. iii. p. 85.
**** Dépêches de Noailles, vol. iii. p. 226.
v Fox vol. iii. p. 35. Heylin, p. 166.
On the day of her execution, her husband, Lord Guildford, desired
permission to see her; but she refused her consent, and informed him
by a message, that the tenderness of their parting would overcome the
fortitude of both, and would too much unbend their minds from
that constancy which their approaching end required of them: their
separation, she said, would be only for a moment; and they would soon
rejoin each other in a scene where their affections would be forever
united, and where death, disappointment, and misfortunes, could no
longer have access to them, or disturb their eternal felicity.[*]
It had been intended to execute the lady Jane and Lord Guildford
together on the same scaffold at Tower Hill; but the council, dreading
the compassion of the people for their youth, beauty, innocence, and
noble birth, changed their orders, and gave directions that she should
be beheaded within the verge of the Tower. She saw her husband led
to execution; and having given him from the window some token of her
remembrance, she waited with tranquillity till her own appointed hour
should bring her to a like fate. She even saw his headless body carried
back in a cart; and found herself more confirmed by the reports which
she heard of the constancy of his end, than shaken by so tender and
melancholy a spectacle. Sir John Gage, constable of the Tower, when he
led her to execution, desired her to bestow on him some small present,
which he might keep as a perpetual memorial of her: she gave him her
table-book, on which she had just written three sentences on seeing
her husband’s dead body; one in Greek, another in Latin, a third in
English.[**] The purport of them was, that human justice was against his
body, but divine mercy would be favorable to his soul; that if her fault
deserved punishment, her youth at least, and her imprudence, were worthy
of excuse; and that God and posterity, she trusted, would show her
favor.
* Heylin, p. 167. Baker p. 319.
** Heylin, p. 167.
On the scaffold she made a speech to the bystanders; in which the
mildness of her disposition led her to take the blame wholly on herself,
without uttering one complaint against the severity with which she had
been treated. She said, that her offence was not the having laid her
hand upon the crown, but the not rejecting it with sufficient constancy;
that she had less erred through ambition than through reverence to
her parents, whom she had been taught to respect and obey: that she
willingly received death, as the only satisfaction which she could now
make to the injured state; and though her infringement of the laws had
been constrained, she would show, by her voluntary submission to their
sentence, that she was desirous to atone for that disobedience into
which too much filial piety had betrayed her: that she had justly
deserved this punishment for being made the instrument, though the
unwilling instrument, of the ambition of others; and that the story of
her life, she hoped, might at least be useful, by proving that innocence
excuses not great misdeeds, if they tend anywise to the destruction of
the commonwealth. After uttering these words, she caused herself to be
disrobed by her women; and with a steady serene countenance submitted
herself to the executioner.[*]
The duke of Suffolk was tried, condemned, and executed soon after; and
would have met with more compassion, had not his temerity been the cause
of his daughter’s untimely end. Lord Thomas Gray lost his life for the
same crime. Sir Nicholas Throgmorton was tried in Guildhall; but there
appearing no satisfactory evidence against him, he was able, by making
an admirable defence, to obtain a verdict of the jury in his favor. The
queen was so enraged at this disappointment, that, instead of releasing
him as the law required, she recommitted him to the Tower, and kept him
in close confinement during some time. But her resentment stopped not
here: the jury, being summoned before the council, were all sent to
prison, and afterwards fined, some of them a thousand pounds, others two
thousand apiece.[**] This violence proved fatal to several; among others
to Sir John Throgmorton, brother to Sir Nicholas, who was condemned on
no better evidence, than had formerly been rejected. The queen filled
the Tower and all the prisons with nobility and gentry, whom their
interest with the nation, rather than any appearance of guilt, had
made the objects of her suspicion; and finding that she was universally
hated, she determined to disable the people from resistance, by ordering
general musters, and directing the commissioners to seize their arms,
and lay them up in forts and castles.[***]
* Heylin, p. 167. Fox, vol iii. p. 36, 37. Holingshed, p.
1099.
** Fox, vol. iii. p. 99. Stowe, p. 624. Baker, p. 320.
Holingshed, p. 1104, 1121. Strype, vol. iii. p. 120. Dép. de
Noailles, vol. iii. p. 173.
*** Dép. de Noailles, vol. iii p. 98.
Though the government labored under so general an odium, the queen’s
authority had received such an increase from the suppression of Wiat’s
rebellion, that the ministry hoped to find a compliant disposition in
the new parliament which was summoned to assemble. The emperor also, in
order to facilitate the same end, had borrowed no less a sum than
four hundred thousand crowns, which he had sent over to England to
be distributed in bribes and pensions among the members: a pernicious
practice, of which there had not hitherto been any instance in England.
And not to give the public any alarm with regard to the church lands,
the queen, notwithstanding her bigotry, resumed her title of supreme
head of the church, which she had dropped three months before. Gardiner,
the chancellor, opened the session by a speech; in which he asserted the
queen’s hereditary title to the crown; maintained her right of choosing
a husband for herself; observed how proper a use she had made of that
right, by giving the preference to an old ally, descended from the house
of Burgundy; and remarked the failure of Henry VIII.’s posterity, of
whom there now remained none but the queen and the lady Elizabeth. He
added, that, in order to obviate the inconveniencies which might arise
from different pretenders, it was necessary to invest the queen, by law,
with a power of disposing of the crown, and of appointing her successor:
a power, he said, which was not to be thought unprecedented in England,
since it had formerly been conferred on Henry VIII.[*]
* Dépêches de Noailles.
The parliament was much disposed to gratify the queen in all her
desires; but when the liberty, independency, and very being of the
nation were in such visible danger, they could not by any means be
brought to compliance. They knew both the inveterate hatred which she
bore to the lady Elizabeth, and her devoted attachment to the house of
Austria: they were acquainted with her extreme bigotry, which would lead
her to postpone all considerations of justice or national interest to
the establishment of the Catholic religion: they remarked, that
Gardiner had carefully avoided in his speech the giving to Elizabeth
the appellation of the queen’s sister; and they thence concluded that a
design was formed of excluding her as illegitimate: they expected that
Mary, if invested with such a power as she required, would make a will
in her husband’s favor, and thereby render England forever a province
to the Spanish monarchy; and they were the more alarmed with these
projects, as they heard that Philip’s descent from the house of
Lancaster was carefully insisted on, and that he was publicly
represented as the true and only heir by right of inheritance.
The parliament, therefore, aware of their danger, were determined to
keep at a distance from the precipice which lay before them. They could
not avoid ratifying the articles of marriage,[*] which were drawn very
favorable for England; but they declined the passing of any such law as
the chancellor pointed out to them: they would not so much as declare it
treason to imagine or attempt the death of the queen’s husband while she
was alive; and a bill introduced for that purpose was laid aside after
the first reading. The more effectually to cut off Philip’s hopes of
possessing any authority in England, they passed a law in which they
declared, “that her majesty, as their only queen, should solely, and as
a sole queen, enjoy the crown and sovereignty of her realms, with all
the preëminences, dignities, and rights thereto belonging, in as large
and ample a manner after her marriage as before, without any title or
claim accruing to the prince of Spain, either as tenant by courtesy of
the realm, or by any other means.”[**]
A law passed in this parliament for reërecting the bishopric of Durham,
which had been dissolved by the last parliament of Edward.[***]
The queen had already, by an exertion of her power, put Tonstal in
possession of that see: but though it was usual at that time for the
crown to assume authority which might seem entirely legislative, it
was always deemed more safe and satisfactory to procure the sanction
of parliament. Bills were introduced for suppressing heterodox opinions
contained in books, and for reviving the law of the six articles,
together with those against the Lollards, and against heresy and
erroneous preaching; but none of these laws could pass the two houses:
a proof that the parliament had reserves even in their concessions with
regard to religion; about which they seem to have been less scrupulous.
The queen, therefore, finding that they would not serve all her
purposes, finished the session by dissolving them.
* I Mar. Parl. 2, cap. 2.
** I Mar. Parl. 2. cap. 1.
*** I Mar. Parl. 2, cap. 3.
Mary’s thoughts were now entirely employed about receiving Don Philip,
whose arrival she hourly expected. This princess, who had lived so many
years in a very reserved and private manner, without any prospect or
hopes of a husband, was so smitten with affection for her young consort,
whom she had never seen, that she waited with the utmost impatience for
the completion of the marriage; and every obstacle was to her a source
of anxiety and discontent.[*] She complained of Philip’s delays as
affected; and she could not conceal her vexation, that, though she
brought him a kingdom as her dowry, he treated her with such neglect
that he had never yet favored her with a single letter.[**] Her fondness
was but the more increased by this supercilious treatment; and when she
found that her subjects had entertained the greatest aversion for the
event to which she directed her fondest wishes, she made the whole
English nation the object of her resentment. A squadron, under the
command of Lord Effingham, had been fitted out to convoy Philip from
Spain, where he then resided; but the admiral informing her that the
discontents ran very high among the seamen, and that it was not safe
for Philip to intrust himself in their hands, she gave orders to dismiss
them.[***] She then dreaded lest the French fleet, being masters of the
sea, might intercept her husband; and every rumor of danger, every blast
of wind, threw her into panics and convulsions. Her health, and even her
understanding, were visibly hurt by this extreme impatience; and she
was struck with a new apprehension lest her person, impaired by time and
blasted by sickness, should prove disagreeable to her future consort.
Her glass discovered to her how haggard she was become; and when she
remarked the decay of her beauty, she knew not whether she ought more to
desire or apprehend the arrival of Philip.[****]
* Strype, vol. iii. p. 125.
** Dépêches de Noailles, vol. iii. p. 248.
*** Dépêches de Noailles, vol. iii. p. 220.
**** Dépêches de Noailles, vol. iii. p. 222, 252, 253.
At last came the moment so impatiently expected; and news was brought
the queen of Philip’s arrival at Southampton.[*] A few days after
they were married in Westminster; and having made a pompous entry into
London, where Philip displayed his wealth with great ostentation, she
carried him to Windsor, the palace in which they afterwards resided. The
prince’s behavior was ill calculated to remove the prejudices which the
English nation had entertained against him. He was distant and
reserved in his address; took no notice of the salutes even of the most
considerable noblemen; and so intrenched himself in form and ceremony
that he was in a manner inaccessible:[**] but this circumstance rendered
him the more acceptable to the queen, who desired to have no company but
her husband’s, and who was impatient when she met with any interruption
to her fondness. The shortest absence gave her vexation; and, when he
showed civilities to any other woman, she could not conceal her jealousy
and resentment.
Mary soon found that Philip’s ruling passion was ambition, and that the
only method of gratifying him and securing his affections was to render
him master of England. The interest and liberty of her people were
considerations of small moment in comparison of her obtaining this
favorite point. She summoned a new parliament, in hopes of finding them
entirely compliant; and, that she might acquire the greater authority
over them, she imitated the precedent of the former reign, and wrote
circular letters, directing a proper choice of members.[***] The zeal of
the Catholics, the influence of Spanish gold, the powers of prerogative,
the discouragement of the gentry, particularly of the Protestants; all
these causes, seconding the intrigues of Gardiner, had procured her a
house of commons which was in a great measure to her satisfaction; and
it was thought, from the disposition of the nation, that she might now
safely omit, on her assembling the parliament, the title of “supreme
head of the church,” though inseparably annexed by law to the crown
of England.[****] Cardinal Pole had arrived in Flanders, invested with
legatine powers from the pope: in order to prepare the way for his
arrival in England, the parliament passed an act reversing his attainder
and restoring his blood; and the queen, dispensing with the old statute
of provisors, granted him permission to act as legate. The cardinal came
over, and, after being introduced to the king and queen, he invited the
parliament to reconcile themselves and the kingdom to the apostolic see,
from which they had been so long and so unhappily divided.
* Fox, vol. iii. p. 99. Heylin, p. 39. Burnet, vol. iii. p.
392. Godwin, p. 345. We are told by Sir William Monson, p.
225, that the admiral of England fired at the Spanish navy
when Philip was on board, because they had not lowered their
topsails, as a mark of deference, to the English navy in the
narrow seas: a very spirited behavior, and very unlike those
times.
** Baker, p. 320.
*** Mem. of Cranm. p. 344. Strype’s Eccl. Mem., vol. iii. p.
154, 155*[**missing period]
**** Burnet, vol. ii. p. 291. Strype, vol. iii. p. 155.
This message was taken in good part; and both houses voted an address
to Philip and Mary, acknowledging that they had been guilty of a most
horrible defection from the true church; professing a sincere repentance
of their past transgressions; declaring their resolution to repeal
all laws enacted in prejudice of the church of Rome; and praying their
majesties, that, since they were happily uninfected with that criminal
schism, they would intercede with the holy father for the absolution
and forgiveness of their penitent subjects.[*] The request was easily
granted. The legate, in the name of his holiness, gave the parliament
and kingdom absolution, freed them from all censures, and received them
again into the bosom of the church. The pope, then Julius III., being
informed of these transactions, said that it was an unexampled instance
of his felicity to receive thanks from the English for allowing them to
do what he ought to give them thanks for performing.[**]
Notwithstanding the extreme zeal of those times for and against popery,
the object always uppermost with the nobility and gentry was their money
and estates: they were not brought to make these concessions in favor of
Rome till they had received repeated assurances, from the pope as well
as the queen, that the plunder which they had made on the ecclesiastics
should never be inquired into; and that the abbey and church lands
should remain with the present possessors.[***] But not trusting
altogether to these promises, the parliament took care, in the law
itself[****] by which they repealed the former statutes enacted against
the pope’s authority, to insert a clause, in which, besides bestowing
validity on all marriages celebrated during the schism, and fixing
the right of incumbents to their benefices, they gave security to
the possessors of church lands, and freed them from all danger of
ecclesiastical censures. The convocation also, in order to remove
apprehensions on that head, were induced to present a petition to the
same purpose;[v] and the legate, in his master’s name, ratified all
these transactions. It now appeared that, notwithstanding the efforts of
the queen and king, the power of the papacy was effectually suppressed
in England, and invincible barriers fixed against its reëstablishment.
For though the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastics was for the present
restored, their property, on which their power much depended, was
irretrievably lost, and no hopes remained of recovering it.
* Fox, vol. iii. p. 3. Heylin, p. 42. Burnet, vol. ii. p.
293. Godwin, p. 247.
** Father Paul, lib. iv.
*** Heylin, p. 41.
**** I and 2 Phil. and Mar. c. 8.
v Heylin, p. 43. I and 2 Phil, and Mar. c. 8. Strype,
vol. iii. p. 159.
Even these arbitrary, powerful, and bigoted princes, while the
transactions were yet recent, could not regain to the church her
possessions so lately ravished from her; and no expedients were left to
the clergy for enriching themselves but those which they had at first
practised, and which had required many ages of ignorance, barbarism, and
superstition to produce their effect on mankind.[*] [21]
The parliament, having secured their own possessions, were more
indifferent with regard to religion, or even to the lives of their
fellow-citizens: they revived the old sanguinary laws against
heretics,[**] which had been rejected in the former parliament: they
also enacted several statutes against seditious words and rumors;[***]
and they made it treason to imagine or attempt the death of Philip
during his marriage with the queen.[****] Each parliament hitherto had
been induced to go a step farther than their predecessors; but none of
them had entirely lost all regard to national interests. Their
hatred against the Spaniards, as well as their suspicion of Philip’s
pretensions, still prevailed; and though the queen attempted to get
her husband declared presumptive heir of the crown, and to have the
administration put into his hands, she failed in all her endeavors,
and could not so much as procure the parliament’s consent to his
coronation.[v] All attempts likewise to obtain subsidies from the
commons, in order to support the emperor in his war against France,
proved fruitless: the usual animosity and jealousy of the English
against that kingdom seemed to have given place, for the present, to
like passions against Spain. Philip, sensible of the prepossessions
entertained against him, endeavored to acquire popularity by procuring
the release of several prisoners of distinction; Lord Henry Dudley, Sir
George Harper, Sir Nicholas Throgmorton, Sir Edmond Warner, Sir William
St. Lo, Sir Nicholas Arnold, Harrington, Tremaine, who had been confined
from the suspicions or resentment of the court.[v*] But nothing was more
agreeable to the nation than his protecting the lady Elizabeth from
the spite and malice of the queen, and restoring her to liberty. This
measure was not the effect of any generosity in Philip, a sentiment of
which he was wholly destitute; but of a refined policy, which made him
foresee that, if that princess were put to death, the next lawful heir
was the queen of Scots, whose succession would forever annex England
to the crown of France. The earl of Devonshire also reaped some benefit
from Philip’s affectation of popularity, and recovered his liberty: but
that nobleman, finding himself exposed to suspicion, begged permission
to travel;[v**] and he soon after died at Padua, from poison, as is
pretended, given him by the imperialists. He was the eleventh and last
earl of Devonshire of that noble family, one of the most illustrious in
Europe.
* See note U, at the end of the volume.
** 1 and 2 Phil. and Mar. c. 6.
*** 1 and 2 Phil. and Mar. c. 3, 9.
**** 1 and 2 Phil. and Mar. c. 10.
v Godwin, p. 348. Baker, p. 322.
v* Heylin, p. 39. Burnet, vol. ii. p. 287. Stowe, p. 626.
Dépêches de Noailles, vol. iv. p. 146, 147.
v** Heylin, p. 40. Godwin, p. 349.
The queen’s extreme desire of having issue had made her fondly
give credit to any appearance of pregnancy; and when the legate was
introduced to her, she fancied that she felt the embryo stir in her
womb.[*] Her flatterers compared this motion of the infant to that of
John the Baptist, who, leaped in his mother’s belly at the salutation
of the Virgin.[**] Despatches were immediately sent to inform foreign
courts of this event: orders were issued to give public thanks: great
rejoicings were made: the family of the young prince was already
settled;[***] for the Catholics held themselves assured that the child
was to be a male: and Bonner, bishop of London, made public prayers be
said, that Heaven would please to render him beautiful, vigorous, and
witty. But the nation still remained somewhat incredulous; and men were
persuaded that the queen labored under infirmities which rendered her
incapable of having children. Her infant proved only the commencement of
a dropsy, which the disordered state of her health had brought upon her.
The belief, however, of her pregnancy was upheld with all possible care;
and was one artifice by which Philip endeavored to support his authority
in the kingdom.
* Dépêches de Noailles, vol. iv. p. 25.
** Burnet, vol. ii. p. 292. Godwin, p. 348.
*** Heylin, p. 46.
{1555.} The parliament passed a law, which, in case of the queen’s
demise, appointed him protector during the minority; and the king
and queen, finding they could obtain no further concessions, came
unexpectedly to Westminster and dissolved them.
There happened an incident this session which must not be passed over
in silence. Several members of the lower house, dissatisfied with the
measures of the parliament, but finding themselves unable to prevent
them, made a secession, in order to show their disapprobation, and
refused any longer to attend the house.[*] For this instance of
contumacy they were indicted in the king’s bench, after the dissolution
of parliament: six of them submitted to the mercy of the court, and paid
their fines: the rest traversed; and the queen died before the affair
was brought to an issue. Judging of the matter by the subsequent claims
of the house of commons, and, indeed, by the true principles of free
government, this attempt of the queen’s ministers must be regarded as
a breach of privilege; but it gave little umbrage at the time, and was
never called in question by any house of commons which afterwards sat
during this reign. The count of Noailles, the French ambassador, says
that the queen threw several members into prison for their freedom of
speech.[**]
* Coke’s Institutes, part iii. p. 17. Strype’s Memor. vol.
i.p.165
** Vol. v. p. 296.