CHAPTER X

1570-1572

At no time since her accession had Elizabeth and her government been in

so much danger as immediately after the suppression of the rebellion of

the north. Cecil had known that the Catholic English and Scottish nobles

and Mary were in constant communication with Spain and the Pope, but

even he was not aware how widespread was the conspiracy.[313] Orange in

the Netherlands, and Coligny in France, had for a time been crushed;

Condé had been killed in battle; and everywhere the Catholic cause was

triumphant. This was the eventuality which alone England had to fear;

and although Spanish aid to the English Catholics was neither so active

nor so abundant as has usually been assumed, unquestionably the hopes

and promises held out both by Philip and the Pope had raised the spirits

of the Catholics in England and Scotland higher than they had been for

many years. Spanish money and support under papal auspices kept Ireland

in a state of discord, as we have seen; Mary appealed to King Philip

as a vassal to her suzerain; the Guisan agents were busy plotting with

the Hamiltons and Murray’s enemies on the Border, and the whole north

of England was riddled with religious discontent. Cecil wrote at the

beginning of 1570 to Norris: “We have discovered some tokens, and we hear

of some words uttered by the Earl of Northumberland, that maketh us think

this rebellion had more branches, both of our own and strangers, than did

appear, and I trust the same will be found out, though perchance when all

are known in secret manner, all may not be notified.”

The truth of Cecil’s forebodings came soon afterwards. On the 22nd

February 1570, Murray was shot by a Hamilton in the streets of

Linlithgow, and in the anarchy which followed, the friends of Mary

Stuart on the Scottish Border invaded England. Maitland of Lethington

and others who had hitherto stood firmly by Murray, now turned to the

side of the Hamiltons and the French party; whilst a special French

Guisan envoy boldly demanded of Elizabeth, in the name of the King of

France, Mary Stuart’s release, permission for himself to pass into

Scotland, and a pledge from the English Queen that in future she would

refrain from supporting the Huguenots. Papal emissaries whispered at

first that the Pope had excommunicated “the flagitious pretended Queen

of England”; and then one Catholic, bolder than the rest (Felton), dared

publicly to post the bull on the Bishop of London’s door. The Bishop

of Ross was tireless in spreading the view of Mary’s innocence and

unmerited sufferings,[314] and many Englishmen who were opposed to her

in everything were scandalised at her continued captivity. So strong a

Protestant as Sir Henry Norris, the English Ambassador in Paris—for ever

the butt of French remonstrance against Mary’s imprisonment—advised Cecil

to have her released. But Sir William knew better the risk of such a step

now, and replied, “Surely few here amongst us conceive it feasible with

surety,” and he was right. Stories, too, came from Flanders of plans to

assassinate Elizabeth; but she was never so strong or wise as when the

circumstances were difficult and dangerous. “I know not,” writes Cecil,

“by what means, but her Majesty is not much troubled with the opinion

of danger; nevertheless I and others cannot be but greatly fearful for

her, and do, and will do, all that in us may lie to understand by God’s

assistance the attempts.”

It was not long before Cecil had once more triumphed over his enemies

on the Council and in England: the danger that then threatened was from

without. Again, the policy of disabling the foreign Catholics by aiding

the Protestants was resorted to. Killigrew was kept busy in Germany

arranging with Hans Casimir and other mercenary leaders, to raise large

forces for the purpose of entering France and enabling the Huguenots to

avenge their disasters.[315] Cardinal Chatillon was still a welcome

guest at the English court. The privateers in the Channel were stronger

and bolder than ever, and had practically swept Spanish shipping from

the narrow seas. The Flemings were encouraged with promises of help and

support when Orange had once more organised a force to cope with Alba.

Sussex and Hunsdon in the meanwhile did not let the grass grow under

their feet, but harried both sides of the Border, stamping out the last

embers of rebellion, and striking terror into the Catholic fugitives,

whilst Morton and the Protestant party were consolidating their position,

momentarily shaken by the murder of Murray.[316] De Spes was ceaselessly

clamouring to the King and Alba for armed intervention in England before

it was too late. Mary might be captured by a _coup de main_, as she

herself suggested, and carried to Spain; a few troops sent to Scotland

now, said the Bishop of Ross, might overturn the new Regency; a small

force in Ireland would easily expel the heretics; “and the whole nation

will rise as soon as they see your Majesty’s standard floating over ships

on their coast.”

But Alba distrusted both French and English, Protestants and Catholics

alike. He knew that the conflagration in the Netherlands was still all

aglow beneath the surface, and he dared not plunge into war with England.

His slow master pondered and plotted, beset with cares and poverty, and

unable to wreak his vengeance upon England until he had the certainty of

Mary Stuart’s exclusive devotion to his interests. But the extent and

complexity of Philip’s difficulties were only known to himself, and the

danger appeared to Cecil even greater than it was.

The plague had raged in London for the whole of the summer of 1569, and a

recrudescence of it in the following June gave Cecil a good opportunity

for advocating Norfolk’s partial enlargement. The Duke made a most

solemn renunciation of his proposed marriage with Mary, and craved

Elizabeth’s forgiveness; and at length in August was allowed to retire

to his own house. That he owed his liberation to Cecil is clear from

his letters. At the beginning of July, apparently, some person—probably

Leicester—had told the Duke that Cecil was against him, and the Secretary

showed him how false this was, and proposed to take action against his

slanderers. The Duke in reply thanked him for his friendly dealing and

his frank explanation, “which have sufficiently purged him (Cecil) and

laid the fault on those who deserved it.” But he begged him to refrain

from further action, as it might cause mischief.[317] When Norfolk at

length was “rid of yonder pestylent infectyous hows” (the Tower), he

unhesitatingly attributed his release to Cecil. How busy the slanderers

of the Secretary were, and how deeply he felt the wounds they dealt him,

may be seen in another statement in his own hand of the same period[318]

(July 1570), which contains an indignant denial of the reports that

had been spread with regard to his alleged dishonest dealing with the

property of his ward the Earl of Oxford.

During the whole of Norfolk’s stay in the Tower and afterwards, the

love-letters between him and Mary continued, the Queen signing her

letters “your own faithful to death,” and using many similar terms of

endearment;[319] and Cecil could hardly have been entirely ignorant

of the Duke’s bad faith. But for political reasons it was considered

necessary, not only to conciliate him, but Mary and the Spaniards as

well. Concurrently, therefore, with the negotiations for Norfolk’s

release, a show of willingness was made to come to terms with Mary.

Her presence in England was an embarrassment and a danger, and now

that Murray was dead, the principal personal obstacle to her return

had disappeared. If she could be so tied down as to be used as a means

for pacifying Scotland, whilst depending for the future entirely

upon England, her return to her country would relieve Elizabeth of a

difficulty. The first basis of negotiation was the surrender of the

English rebel Lords in exchange for her, and the delivery to England of

four or six of the principal Scottish nobles and the young Prince as

hostages. But these terms were by no means acceptable to Mary’s agents or

to herself. She feared that the Scots would kill her, and the English her

son, and so secure the joint kingdoms to a nominee of Elizabeth or Cecil.

The main reason for Elizabeth’s change of attitude must be sought in the

panic which seized upon England in the early summer of 1570. A powerful

Spanish fleet was in the Channel, ostensibly to convey Philip’s fourth

wife, Anne of Austria, from Flanders to Spain; but rumours came that

the dreaded Duke of Alba was ready now for the invasion of England. The

Guises in Normandy, too, were said to have an army of harquebussiers

waiting to embark for Scotland; the Irish rebels were being helped both

by Philip and the Guises. The Pope’s bull absolving Englishmen from their

oaths of allegiance was the talk everywhere, and English merchants in

despair cried that at last they and their country were to pay for the

depredations of the pirates. The French were demanding haughtily that the

English troops should evacuate the Border Scottish fortresses held by

them, and the Protestants in France and Flanders were not yet prepared to

furnish the diversion upon which the English usually depended for their

own safety.

The position was very grave in appearance, though not so great in

reality, and it alarmed Elizabeth out of her equanimity. De Guaras says

that she shut herself up for three days, and railed against Cecil for

bringing her to such a pass; and the same observer reports that when

Cecil one day in the middle of July left the Queen and retired to his

own apartment, he cried to his wife in deep distress, “O wife! if God do

not help us we shall be lost and undone. Get together all the jewels and

money you can, that you may follow me when the time comes; for surely

trouble is in store for us.”[320] This may or may not be true in detail,

and also Guaras’ assertion that Cecil had sent large private funds to

Germany, whither he would retire in case of trouble; but it is certain

that panic reigned supreme for a few weeks in the summer, accentuated,

doubtless, by the plague which was devastating the country. But fright

did not paralyse the minister for long, if at all. Twenty-five ships

were hastily armed, two fresh armies were raised of five thousand men

each, ostensibly for Scotland. Mary was prompted to send Livingston to

Scotland to negotiate an arrangement with the Regent Lennox, and Cecil

himself, with Sir Walter Mildmay, was induced to go and confer with

Mary at Chatsworth; but, says De Spes, “all these things are simply

tricks of Cecil’s, who thinks thereby to cheat every one, in which to a

certain extent he succeeds.” The Secretary had by this time discovered

that in any case neither Philip nor Alba would raise a finger to avenge

a slight upon De Spes, for he had imprisoned him and distressed him in

a thousand ways already without retaliation. At the same time, a blow

at such a notorious conspirator as he was could not fail to produce

a great effect upon the English Catholics who plotted with him and

looked to Spain alone for support. Cecil therefore sent Fitzwilliams

to Flanders about the seizures, and instructed him to complain to

Alba of De Spes’ communications with the rebels. “His object,” wrote

the Ambassador, “is to expel me, now that they think I understand the

affairs of this country; and Cecil thinks that I, with others, might

make such representations to the Queen as would diminish his great

authority.… Cecil is a crafty fox, a mortal enemy of the Catholics and

to our King, and it is necessary to watch his designs very closely,

because he proceeds with the greatest caution and dissimulation. There

is nothing in his power he does not attempt to injure us. The Queen’s

own opinion is of little importance, and that of Leicester less; so that

Cecil unrestrainedly and arrogantly governs all.… Your worship may be

certain that if Cecil is allowed to have his way he will disturb the

Netherlands.”[321] De Spes’ information was correct on the latter point,

as well it might be, for in addition to Cecil’s own secretary, Allington,

he had in his pay Sir James Crofts, a member of the Council, and the

Secretary of the Council, Bernard Hampton, who between them brought him

news of everything that passed in the Council or in Cecil House.

The Secretary’s efforts to get rid of so troublesome a guest as De Spes,

and to offer an object-lesson to the English Catholics at the same time,

were persistent, and in the end successful. De Spes was refused the

treatment of an ambassador, threatened with the Tower, flouted, slighted,

and insulted at every turn; but he could only futilely storm and fret,

for neither his King nor Alba was pleased with the difficult position

which his violence had created for them in England. It was all the fault

of Cecil personally, insisted De Spes. He wished to afflict the Catholic

cause without witnesses, and would stick at nothing, even poison, to get

rid of the Spaniard.

Cecil would have liked to avoid his mission to Mary Stuart, for he

was almost crippled with constant gout, and he was fully aware of

the hollowness of the negotiations in hand. The interviews with Mary

could hardly have been agreeable, although they were carried out with

great formality and politeness on both sides. Cecil charged her with

a knowledge of the northern rebellion, which she only partly denied,

saying, however, that she did not encourage it. Mary seems to have been

alternately passionate and tearful; but her bad adviser, the Bishop of

Ross, was by her side, and though she argued her case shrewdly, she

could not refrain from unwisely and unnecessarily wounding Elizabeth at

the outset.[322] In the second article of the proposed treaty, where

Elizabeth’s issue were to be preferred in the succession, Mary altered

the words to “lawful issue,” to which Elizabeth, although acceding to it,

replied that Mary “measured other folk’s disposition by her own actions.”

After some acrimony on the subject of other alterations on behalf of

Mary, an arrangement was arrived at, which, however, was afterwards

vetoed by the Scottish Government,[323] at the instance of Morton, who

was the Commissioner in London.

Whilst the negotiations with Mary had been progressing, peace had been

signed between the Huguenots and Charles IX. at St. Germains (August

1570), and the fears of Elizabeth and Cecil were consequently aggravated

at the plans which were known to be promoted by Cardinal Lorraine for

the marriage of the Duke of Anjou, next brother to the French King, with

the Queen of Scots. Now that the Montmorencis and the “politicians” had

reconciled parties in France, the danger of such a match became serious

both to England and the sincere Huguenots. Anjou posed as the figurehead

of the extreme Catholic party, but was known to be vaguely ambitious and

unstable. Cardinal Chatillon therefore thought it would be a good move

to disarm him by yoking him under Huguenot auspices to Elizabeth. The

first approach was made by the Vidame de Chartres to Cecil, who privately

discussed it with the Queen. They must have regarded it with favour, for

it was exactly the instrument they needed for splitting the league, and

arousing jealousy between France and Spain. The Emperor had just given a

severe rebuff to attempts to revive the Archduke’s match with Elizabeth,

but the negotiation for making a French Catholic prince King-consort of

England under Huguenot control was a master-stroke which sufficed to

overturn all international combinations, set France and Spain by the

ears, turned the Guises, as relatives of Mary Stuart, against their

principal supporter in France, and reduced the Queen of Scots herself to

quite a secondary element in the problem. The idea was just as welcome

to Catharine de Medici, who hated Mary Stuart as much as she dreaded the

Guises. Both she and the young King would have been glad to be quit of

the ambitious Anjou, who always threw in his weight on the Catholic side,

and made it more difficult for the Queen-mother to hold the balance. So,

very soon Guido Cavalcanti was speeding backwards and forwards between

England and France, secretly preparing the way for the more formal

negotiations between the official Ambassadors.

So far as the Queen of England was concerned, the negotiation was purely

political and insincere, for the reasons just stated, but the comedy

was well played by all parties. Leicester of course was favourable, for

it meant bribes to him, and there was no danger. La Mothe Fénélon, the

Ambassador, gently broached the matter to the Queen at Hampton Court

in January 1571. As usual she was coy and coquettish. She was too old

for Anjou, she objected, but still she said the princes of the House

of France had the reputation of being good husbands.[324] Cardinal

Chatillon shortly afterwards was blunter than the Ambassador. Would the

Queen marry Anjou if he proposed? he asked, to which Elizabeth replied,

that on certain conditions she would; and the next day she submitted the

subject to her Council, who, as in duty bound, threw the whole of the

responsibility on to the Queen.

Walsingham had just replaced Norris as Ambassador to France. He was a

friend of Leicester, a strict Protestant, who had been indoctrinated in

the political methods of Cecil, with whom and with Leicester he kept up

a close confidential correspondence.[325] One of his first letters to

Leicester gives a personal description of the young Prince, in which a

desire to tell the truth struggles with his duty not to say anything

which may hamper the negotiation. The Guises and the Spanish party in

Paris exhorted Anjou to avoid being drawn into the net, and the Duke

himself at one time openly used insulting expressions towards Elizabeth;

but such was the position in England that it was absolutely necessary

that an appearance of reality should be given to the affair. Prudent

Cecil, as usual, avoided pledging himself personally more than necessary,

and wrote from Greenwich to Walsingham on the 3rd March, that he had

wished the Queen herself to write her instructions, but as she had

declined to do so, he merely repeated her words in a postscript—namely,

that if he (Walsingham) were approached on the matter of the marriage, he

might say that before he left England he had heard “that the Queen, upon

consideration of the benefit of her realm, and to content her subjects,

had resolved to marry if she should find a fit husband, who must be

of princely rank.” To this Cecil himself adds as his private opinion,

to be told to no one, “I am not able to discern what is best, but

surely I see no continuance of her quietness without a marriage.”[326]

Matters were indeed critical at this juncture, and Cecil, Leicester,

and even Walsingham, repeatedly, and apparently with sincerity, stated

their opinion that Elizabeth would be forced to wed Anjou, or he would

marry Mary Stuart, as it was necessary for Catharine de Medici and the

Huguenots to get rid of this fanatical figurehead of the extreme Catholic

party.[327]

In his letter to Walsingham of 1st March, Cecil signs his name thus, “By

your assured (as I was wont) William Cecil;” and then underneath, “And as

I am now ordered to write, William Burleigh.”[328] That the title was not

of his own seeking is almost certain. The Spanish Ambassador, De Spes,

says that the Queen ennobled him in order that he might be more useful

in Parliament and in the matter of the Queen of Scots; and the new Lord

himself, in a letter to Nicholas White, speaks thus slightingly of his

new honour: “My style is Lord of Burghley if you mean to know it for your

writing, and if you list to write truly, the poorest Lord in England.

Yours, not changed in friendship, though in name, William Burghley.” To

Walsingham again he wrote on the 25th March, “My style of my poor degree

is Lord of Burghley;” and on the 14th April in a letter to the same

correspondent he signs, “William Cecill—I forgot my new word, William

Burleigh.”

At the time of his elevation the new Lord was suffering from one of his

constantly recurring fits of gout, and his letters are mostly written,

with pain and difficulty, which he frequently mentions, “from my bed

in my house at Westminster.” And yet, withal, the amount of work he

got through at the time was nothing short of marvellous. Every matter,

great and small, seemed to be dealt with by him. He was a Member of

Parliament for the two counties of Lincoln and Northampton;[329] as

Chancellor of the University of Cambridge he was deeply interested in

the interminable disputes there with regard to ritual, vestments, and

scholastic questions; as President of the Court of Wards he attended

personally to an immense number of estates and private interests;[330]

and acquaintances, high and low, from Greys, Howards, Clintons, and

Dudleys, down to poor students or alien refugees, still by common accord

addressed their petitions for aid and advice to him. To judge by their

grateful acknowledgments, they seem rarely to have appealed to him in

vain, and it is evident by the hundreds of such letters at Hatfield, that

even when petitions could not be granted, they were assured of impartial

and just consideration from Lord Burghley. His own great establishments,

too, at Burghley, Theobalds, and London, must have claimed much of his

attention, for all accounts passed under his own eyes, and in such small

matters as the rotation of crops, the sale of produce, the breeding

of stock, and the replenishment of gardens, nothing was done without

consultation with the master. His hospitality was very great; for we are

told by his domestic biographer that “he kept open house everywhere,

and his steward kept a standing table for gentlemen, besides two other

long tables, often twice set out, one for the clerk of the kitchen, and

the other for yeomen.” He personally can have had but little enjoyment

from his splendid houses and stately living. He must have been almost

constantly at court, or hard at work at his house in Cannon Row,

Westminster, handy for Whitehall, rather than at his new palace in the

Strand, where his wife and family lodged. He seems to have had no hobby

but books and gardens, and to have taken no exercise except on his rare

visits to Theobalds or Burghley, when he would jog round his garden paths

on an ambling mule.

This was the man, vigilant, prudent, moderate, cautious and untiring in

his industry, who in the spring and summer of 1571 by his consummate

statecraft once more brought England out of the coil of perils which

surrounded her on all sides. His counter-move to Spanish support to the

rebels in England and Ireland, and to Guisan plots in Scotland, was to

supply arms, munitions, and money to the Protestants of Rochelle and the

Dutch privateers, and to fit out a strong English fleet. The pacification

of France and the crushing of reform in Flanders were answered by

remittances of money to Germany to raise mercenaries for Orange, and the

welcoming of Louis of Nassau and Cardinal Chatillon in England; whilst

the marriage of Charles IX. to an Austrian Princess, and the closer

relations between France and the Catholic league, were counteracted by

the marriage negotiations between Elizabeth and Anjou, and the treaty

with Mary Stuart for her restoration.

But as the effect of Cecil’s diplomacy gradually became apparent, the

more reckless of his opponents resorted to desperate devices to frustrate

him. Already, by February 1571, Mary Stuart had convinced herself that

the treaty for her liberation was fallacious, and she wrote an important

letter to the Bishop of Ross, from which great events sprang.[331] She

refers to plans for her escape, and announces her decision to go to

Spain, throwing herself in future entirely upon Philip as her protector;

and she urges that Ridolfi should be sent to Spain and Rome to explain

her situation and resolve, and to beg for help. Norfolk was to be asked

to pledge himself finally to become a Catholic; doubt as to his religion,

she says, having been the principal reason for Philip’s lukewarmness.

The Bishop sent a copy of the letter to Norfolk, who was still nominally

under arrest. The Duke gave his consent, and Ridolfi started from England

at the end of March. It has been frequently denied that Norfolk connived

at this proposal for the invasion of England by a foreign power; but,

in addition to the depositions of Ross and Barker,[332] the following

letter from De Spes introducing Ridolfi to Philip appears to settle the

question against the Duke:[333] “The Queen of Scots, and the Duke of

Norfolk on behalf of many other lords and gentlemen who are attached to

your Majesty’s interests, and the promotion of the Catholic religion, are

sending Rodolfo Ridolfi, a Florentine gentleman, to offer their services

to your Majesty, and to represent to you that the time is now ripe to

take a step of great benefit to Christianity, as in detail Ridolfi will

set forth to your Majesty. The letter of credence from the Duke of

Norfolk is written in the cipher that I have sent to Zayas, for fear it

should be taken. London, 25th March, 1571.” The exact proposal to be made

verbally by Ridolfi is not stated, but De Spes refers to it in his next

letter as “the real remedy” for Lord Burghley’s activity. It is probable

that not only the support of Mary and Norfolk was intended, but also the

assassination of Elizabeth and her minister.[334] Cecil had been put

upon the alert by the kidnapping in Flanders and bringing to England of

the notorious Dr. Storey, who, under torture in the Tower, had divulged

the dealings of the northern Lords with Alba through Ridolfi and the

Bishop of Ross. This caused Cecil to keep a watch upon the doings of

both the agents; and Lord Cobham, in Dover, was instructed to intercept

any cipher letters which might be brought by a Flemish secretary of the

Bishop of Ross, one Charles Bailly, who was with Ridolfi in Flanders.

The man was stopped and his papers captured, with some copies of the

Bishop of Ross’s book in favour of Mary’s claims. The Cobhams were never

to be trusted; and Thomas Cobham surreptitiously obtained the cipher

keys, and had them conveyed to De Spes, substituting for them a dummy

packet, which was sent to Cecil. But Bailly himself, who had written

the papers at Ridolfi’s dictation, was promptly put on the rack in the

Tower, and confessed that the letters were written to two persons,

designated by numbers, under cover to the Bishop, and conveyed the Duke

of Alba’s approval of the plan for invading England, and his readiness,

if authorised by his King, to co-operate with the persons indicated.

Letters sent by the Bishop to Bailly after his arrest, urging him to

firmness, threatening the traitor who had betrayed him, and in a hundred

ways proving his own complicity, were all intercepted and read. The

tortured wretch swore to the Bishop that he would tell nothing, even if

they tore him into a hundred pieces; begged that his trunk containing

drafts of letters from Mary to Cardinal Lorraine and Hamilton might be

rescued from his lodging. But Burghley forestalled them all. The whole

of the letters were taken, and every day, in the Tower, fresh rackings,

and threats to cut off his ears or his head, were used by Burghley

to the frightened lad, to force him to give a key of the cipher. One

morning at five o’clock he was carried by the Lieutenant of the Tower

to Lord Burghley, and was told that, unless he immediately confessed

all, he would be racked till the truth was torn from him. The lad, half

distraught, day by day unfolded as much as he knew, notwithstanding the

Bishop’s frantic assurances that Burghley would not dare to harm him

much, as he was a foreigner and a servant of the Queen of Scots.[335]

And so, piece by piece, the whole conspiracy was unravelled so far as

regarded the main object, and the complicity of Alba, the Spaniards and

the Bishop of Ross proved beyond doubt; but still the persons indicated

by the cipher numbers “30” and “40” could only be surmised, for Bailly

himself did not know them. Gradually the names of Mary Stuart and Norfolk

crept into the depositions of those examined, but without sufficient

definiteness yet for open proceedings against them to be commenced.

Whilst Lord Burghley, with inexhaustible patience, was tracking the

plot to its source, the most elaborate pretence of agreement with the

French on the subject of the Anjou match was kept up both in Paris and

London; though more sincere on the part of the former than the latter,

for Catharine and Charles IX. were in mortal fear of the Guises, the

League, and the heir-presumptive to the crown. Cavalcanti and officers of

the King’s household ran backwards and forwards to England with loving

messages; and the Huguenots worked their best to bring the matter to

a successful issue, or, in default of it, for a close alliance. Henry

Cobham was sent to Madrid ostensibly to treat on the matter of the

seizures, but really to learn, if possible, how far Philip was pledged to

the plans against England; but the Spaniards were forewarned and ready

for him, and he learned nothing.

Lord Burghley had, however, a better plan than this. Fitzwilliam, a

relative of the English Duchess of Feria, had been sent to Spain by him

for the purpose of negotiating for the release of the men and hostages

who had been captured from Hawkins at San Juan de Ulloa. He professed

in Spain to be strongly Catholic and in favour of Mary Stuart, and came

back to England in 1571, with presents, pledges, and promises to the

captive Queen and her friends. Hawkins lay with a strong auxiliary fleet

at the mouth of the Channel, and it was agreed with Lord Burghley that

Fitzwilliam and Hawkins should hoodwink the Spaniards, obtain a good haul

for themselves, and at the same time trace the ramifications of the great

international plot against England. De Spes jumped at the bait, with but

a mere qualm of misgiving, when Fitzwilliam went and offered, on behalf

of Hawkins, to desert with all his fleet to Spain, and take part, if

necessary, in an attack upon England. When he wrote to the King he said,

“My only fear is lest Burghley himself may have set the matter afoot to

discover your Majesty’s feelings, though I have seen nothing to make me

think this.”

But it was exactly the case, nevertheless, and the ruse succeeded beyond

expectation. By the end of August all Hawkins’ men had been released in

Spain and sent back to England, with ten dollars each in their pockets,

and Hawkins himself was the better off by £40,000 of Spanish money. But

more than this: Burghley had obtained through Fitzwilliam full knowledge

of the aims of the Ridolfi conspiracy. It was clear now to demonstration

that the Pope,[336] Philip, and the Catholic party in France were pledged

to a vast crusade against England, for crushing Protestantism, destroying

Elizabeth,[337] and raising Mary Stuart to the thrones of Great

Britain. Burghley and the Queen had practically known it for months,

as we have seen, and already the diplomatic measures they had taken to

counteract it were producing their effects. But now that the evidence was

sufficient, the blow against the conspirators could be struck openly. All

unsuspecting still, De Spes was comforting himself with the reflection

that the capture of Bailly was an unimportant incident; he urged Alba

and the King to immediate action, fumed at the instructions he received

to hold back Philip’s letters to Mary and Norfolk until he had orders to

deliver them, and sneered at the timid delay. “As all of Lord Burghley’s

jests have turned out well for him hitherto, he is ready to undertake

anything, and has no fear of danger. They and the French together make

great fun of our meekness.” “It is a pity to lose time, for Lord Burghley

is continuing to oppress the Catholics. If the opportunity is lost this

year, I fear the false religion will prevail in this island in a way

which will make it a harsh neighbour for the Netherlands.”

The opportunity, though he did not know it, had been lost already, for

all the threads were now in Burghley’s hands, and he was master of

the situation. In August was intercepted the bag of money (£600) with

a cipher letter[338] being sent secretly to Herries and Kirkaldy of

Grange, Mary’s friends in Scotland, by the Duke of Norfolk’s secretary,

and in a day or two the net swept into the Tower the Duke and all the

underlings who had served as intermediaries. Burghley lost no time now.

Almost every day, threats or the rack wrung some fresh admission from

the instruments—secretaries, messengers, and the like. Norfolk at first,

with extreme effrontery, denied everything;[339] but he was a weak man,

and soon broke down. Even then De Spes did not see that all was lost.

“The Catholics,” he said, “are many, though their leaders be few, and

Lord Burghley, with his terrible fury, has greatly harassed and dismayed

them, for they are afraid even of speaking to each other. The whole

affair depends upon getting weapons into their hands, and giving them

some one to direct them.”[340] It was too late. Mary Stuart’s prison

was made closer; her correspondence was intercepted and read; there was

no more concealment necessary or possible. One Catholic noble after the

other was isolated and imprisoned; Dr. Storey’s dreadful fate was held

up as a warning to traitors, and London and the country was flooded with

broadsheets calculated to arouse English and Protestant sentiment to

fever heat at the dastardly conspiracy which was laid bare.

On the 14th December a message reached De Spes summoning him to the

Council at Whitehall. When he arrived there he found them awaiting

him, with Lord Burghley as spokesman. There was no mincing matters.

The Ambassador was told that he had plotted with traitors against the

Queen’s life and the peace of the country, and he would be expelled, as

Dr. Man had been from Spain with far less reason.[341] De Spes tried to

brazen it out, but ineffectually. Burghley was on firm ground: no delay,

he said, could be allowed, excepting the time absolutely necessary for

the preparations for the voyage, which time was to be passed out of

London.[342] Speechless, almost, with indignation, in pretended fear that

Burghley would have him killed, De Spes was hustled out of the country he

had sought to ruin, and a week afterwards (16th January 1572) the Duke of

Norfolk was tried by his peers and found guilty of the capital crime of

high treason.

De Spes left England with bitter resentment at the triumph of Burghley’s

diplomacy. “They will now,” he says, “make themselves masters of the

Channel, and with one blow, with their practices in Flanders, will

plunge that country into a dreadful war. It is of no use now to speak of

our lost opportunities. They have gone; but … steps may still be taken

to make these people weep in their own country.” When he arrived in

Flanders he made a long report of his embassy, containing the following

interesting appreciation of Burghley as he appeared to his greatest

enemy: “The principal person in the Council is William Cecil, now Lord

Burghley, a Knight of the Garter. He is a man of mean sort, but very

astute, false, lying, and full of artifice. He is a great heretic, and

such a clownish Englishman as to believe that all the Christian princes

joined together are not able to injure the sovereign of his country,

and he therefore treats their ministers with great arrogance. This man

manages the bulk of the business, and by means of his vigilance and

craftiness, together with his utter unscrupulousness of word and deed,

thinks to outwit the ministers of other princes, which to some extent he

has hitherto succeeded in doing.”

Before De Spes was expelled, the efforts of Burghley, Walsingham, and

De Foix had been successful in arranging the terms of a close political

alliance between France and England. Elizabeth swore to Cavalcanti that

she would never trust Spaniards again, and he might see how little she

cared for the King of Spain by the way she had treated his Ambassador.

She could, indeed, afford now to slight the most powerful monarch in the

world; for one of the counter-strokes to the Spanish-Papal plot had been

the concentration in the Channel of a great fleet of Flemish and Huguenot

privateers under the Count de la Mark, and during the winter a plan had

been perfected for the seizure by the “beggars” of Brille, the key to

Zeeland. The imposition in Flanders of the tax which ruined Spain had

been the last straw,[343] and the whole country was ripe for revolt. For

some time an arrangement had been in progress with Louis of Nassau, by

which the Huguenots should invade Flanders over the French frontier, in

the interest of the Flemish Protestants. However friendly Elizabeth might

be with France, this was a proceeding which was sure to be looked upon

by English statesmen with profound distrust; and Walsingham, writing to

Cecil on the last day of 1571,[344] says that he has been asked whether,

in the event of the French entering Flanders, the Queen of England will

take Zeeland, as the Flemings fear that the French may not be contented

with Flanders. Some time before this, in September, Walsingham had urged

Cecil to promote this invasion of Flanders by the French, as a means of

keeping the Huguenots in power, as well as embarrassing Spain. “If not,”

he says, “the Guises will bear sway, who will be so forward in preferring

the conquest of Ireland, and the advancement of their niece to the crown

of England, as the other side (_i.e._ the Huguenots) is contrariwise

bent to prefer the conquest of Flanders.” When the immediate danger from

the Guises was over, however, the idea of a French invasion of Flanders

could not be calmly endured without some corresponding move in English

interests, and joint action in the Netherlands was suggested. It is

assumed by Motley and most other historians that the capture of Brille by

the “beggars” under La Mark early in April was quite unpremeditated, but

De Spes warned Alba that the affair was being planned in England at least

six months before;[345] and the sending away from Dover of La Mark’s

fleet did not, as Motley surmises, arise alone from Elizabeth’s fear of

offending Spain—for that she had already done—but from the complaints

of the Easterling merchants that their trade with England had become

impossible whilst these freebooters of the seas lay off the coast. In any

case, the surprise and seizure of Brille by the “beggars” once more gave

Alba plenty to think about on his own side of the Straits; and England

might, for the present, breathe freely again.

It had been as necessary for Catharine de Medici as for Elizabeth to

provide against the complete domination of England and Scotland by a

Spanish-Papal conspiracy in favour of Mary Stuart, and she had seconded

Walsingham strenuously in endeavouring to overcome Anjou’s religious

scruples against marrying Elizabeth. Anjou shifted like the wind, as

he fell under the influence of the Guises and his mother alternately.

Sometimes the match looked certain, and Catharine was effusive in

her thanks to Burghley; the next week it appeared hopeless. But the

intrigue served its purpose, and kept the French Government friendly

with Elizabeth during the critical time of the Spanish-Guisan conspiracy

against her—a conspiracy which also threatened Catharine’s influence

in France. Burghley himself seems to have been at a loss to understand

Elizabeth’s real intentions at the time; but it would appear that both he

and Walsingham were in earnest in wishing for the Anjou match, of course

with the safeguards laid down in Cecil’s several minutes on the matter;

but “the conferences,” wrote the Secretary, “have as many variations as

there are days.”

When at length it was seen that Anjou would no longer act as a party to

the game, but was looking to the possibility of a marriage with Mary

Stuart or with a Polish princess, the idea of the marriage of Elizabeth

with his youngest brother, the Duke of Alençon, was again very cautiously

brought up by Sir Thomas Smith and Killigrew, who were acting as English

Ambassadors in France during Walsingham’s illness. Alençon was only a lad

as yet, and could be used without loss of dignity as a stalking-horse

until the treaty of close alliance was finally agreed upon between the

two countries. The inevitable Guido Cavalcanti broached the matter

to Burghley in January, as he was coming away from an interview with

Elizabeth, and after some conference Burghley himself discussed the

matter with the Queen. She was thirty-nine, and the suggested bridegroom

was barely seventeen; but she was full of curiosity as to the looks

of the suitor, and distrustful about their respective ages. She asked

Burghley how tall Alençon was. “About as tall as I am,” replied the

Secretary. “About as tall as your grandson, you mean,” snapped her

Majesty,[346] and so the colloquy ended for a time. On the 19th April

1572 the draft treaty between England and France was signed at Blois.

It provided that aid was to be given unofficially by both nations to

the revolted Hollanders; the fleet of Protestant privateers was to be

sheltered and encouraged, and Huguenot Henry of Navarre was to marry the

King’s sister Margaret. The Protestants and politicians of France had

thus for the moment triumphed all along the line; the connection between

England and France was closer than it had been for many years, and

Elizabeth and Burghley could look back upon a great peril to their nation

and their faith manfully met and astutely overcome.

The Catholic party in England was now utterly prostrate. The Duke of

Norfolk, condemned to death for treason, was respited again and again

by the Queen, whilst he abjectly prevaricated, and threw the blame upon

others. The Bishop of Ross and Barker, he said, had forsworn him: he

never meant to bring a foreign force to England to depose the Queen,

and so forth. From the first, Burghley, who had always been Norfolk’s

friend, urged the Queen to let the law take its course.[347] He has been

bitterly blamed for doing so; but seeing the danger to which Norfolk’s

treason had reduced the realm, he would have failed in his duty as a

First Minister if he had allowed any weakness or personal consideration

to stand in the way of the just punishment for a great crime. Norfolk,

though he was the most popular man and greatest noble in the realm, and

still has many apologists, had plotted with the enemies of England to

bring the country again under foreign tutelage for his own ambition, and

it was right that he should suffer.

That Burghley did not flinch in the case of a man with so many friends,

is a proof of his rectitude and his courage. Though Norfolk himself

must have known what his attitude was, his esteem for him was evidently

not lessened. In the first letter he wrote to the Queen after his

condemnation, 21st January 1572, he prays for “her Majesty’s forgiveness

for his manifold offences, that he may leave this vale of misery with

a lighter heart and quieter conscience. He desires that Lord Burghley

should act as guardian to his poor orphans,” and he signs his letter,

“Written by the woeful hand of a dead man, your Majesty’s unworthy

subject, Thomas Howard”;[348] and when this prayer was granted, he again

wrote to the Queen expressing “his comfort at hearing of her Majesty’s

intended goodness to his unfortunate brats, and that she had christened

them with such an adopted father as Lord Burghley.”[349] At length, when

Parliament had added its pressure to that of her minister’s, the Queen’s

real or pretended reluctance to execute her near kinsman was overcome,

and the Duke’s head fell on Tower Hill, 2nd June, before the lamentations

of a great populace, who loved him above any subject of the Queen.

Less than a week afterwards Marshal Montmorenci, Paul de Foix, and

a splendid embassy arrived in England for the purpose of formally

ratifying the treaty of alliance between England and France, a

corresponding embassy from England under Lord Lincoln being in France

for a similar purpose. The courts vied with each other in their splendid

entertainments. The Frenchmen with forty followers were lodged in

Somerset House. At Whitehall, at Windsor (where Montmorenci received the

Garter), at Leicester House, and at Cecil House, sumptuous banquets were

given, followed by masques, balls, and tourneys. There was much talk

about the Duke of Alençon, but no decided answer given by Elizabeth to

the hints of marriage, which, indeed, was not now so pressing a matter

for her as it had been. When the Frenchmen had taken leave, Burghley sent

to Walsingham an interesting letter giving some account of the embassy,

by which it is clear that the Queen still desired to keep up the talk

of the marriage, in view of a possible need to draw still closer to the

French. “I am willed,” he writes, “to require you to use all good means

to understand what you can of the Duke of Alençon, his age in certainty,

of his stature, his conditions, his inclination in religion, his devotion

this way, his followers and servitors: hereof her Majesty seeketh

speedily to be advertised, that she may resolve before the month.” He

says, that for his part, he can see no great dislike of the idea, except

in the matter of age, and hints at getting Calais as the young Prince’s

dower. “If somewhat be not advised to recompense the opinion that her

Majesty conceiveth, as that she should be misliked to make choice of

so young a prince, I doubt the end.”[350] When, however, Lincoln came

back from France loaded with plate and jewels, and full of praise of the

gallantry of Alençon, the Queen became somewhat warmer, and Walsingham

for weeks to come was bombarded with minute questions as to the personal

qualities, and particularly as to the pock-marked visage, of the suitor.

There was but one more of the great conspirators against England to

deal with. Norfolk had deservedly died the death of a traitor, and

those who had supported him were either dead or lingering sufferers in

prison, the disloyal Catholics were despairing, Spain had received its

answer by the expulsion of De Spes and the renewal of the war in the

Netherlands, whilst Coligny and the Huguenots rode rough-shod over the

Guises and their friends. But the very spring-head of the conspiracy

remained untouched. A commission was appointed in June to formulate

charges against Mary Stuart herself,[351] and in Parliament it was

resolved that she was unworthy to succeed to the English crown. But

Elizabeth again allowed her personal feeling to stand in the way of her

patriotic duty, or, as some would prefer to say, desired to fix upon

others the responsibility of a grave act against her own order and kin.

Burghley, in his letter already quoted, written at the end of June to

Walsingham, says: “Now for Parliament: I cannot write patiently: all

that we laboured for, and with full consent brought to fashion, I mean

a law to make the Scottish Queen unable and unworthy of succession of

the crown, was by her Majesty neither assented to nor rejected, but

deferred until the feast of All Saints; but what all other good and wise

men think thereof, you may guess. Some here have, as it seemeth, abused

their favour about her Majesty, to make herself her most enemy. God amend

them.”[352]

A fortnight after this letter was written Burghley was made Lord

Treasurer of England in place of the Marquis of Winchester, who had

recently died. The work and strain of the Secretaryship had gravely

affected Burghley’s health, and early in the previous April he had been

so ill that his life was despaired of. De Guaras, the merchant who

acted informally as Spanish agent, says that the Queen and most of the

Councillors visited him, in the belief that his state was desperate.[353]

For some time he had been begging for permission to rest, but until the

great matters in hand were settled, this was impossible. The sky over

England had once more become cleared, and the great minister could hand

over to his old friend Sir Thomas Smith the Secretaryship, in which he

had done such signal service to the State.

The day after the elevation of Burghley to the Treasurership, the Queen

started on one of the stately progresses which caused so much delight and

enthusiasm to all her subjects but those who had to entertain her, except

perhaps Burghley and his rival Leicester, who were both honoured during

this summer with a visit from the sovereign. Burghley’s entry of the

great event comes curtly enough in his diary after the memorandum of his

new appointment, thus:—

“1572. July 15. Lord Burghley made Lord Treasurer of England.”

“July 22. The Queen’s Majesty at Theobalds.”[354]

Elizabeth had visited Theobalds in 1564 and 1571. On this occasion her

stay extended over three days, and the domestic biographer of Burghley

thus refers to this amongst other visits: “His Lordship’s extraordinary

chardg in enterteynment of the Quene was greater to him than to anie of

her subjects, for he enterteyned her at his house twelve several tymes,

which cost him two or three thousand pounds each tyme.… But his love for

his Sovereign, and joy to enterteyn her and her traine, was so greate, as

he thought no troble, care, nor cost too much, and all too little.”

Whilst Elizabeth slowly made her way from one great house to another,

by Gorhambury,[355] Dunstable, Woburn,[356] and so to Kenilworth, the

correspondence on the negotiations for the Alençon match became warmer

and warmer. Agents and messengers speeded backwards and forwards with

portraits and amiable trifles, particularly from the side of England.

There was a good reason for this. Before even the treaty of alliance

was signed, Burghley had deplored that Charles IX. and his mother were

cooling in the agreement for France and England jointly to aid the

Flemish rebels. The Pope and the Emperor were trying their hardest to

withdraw Charles and his mother from the compromise into which he had

entered with Elizabeth; and already the young King and Catharine de

Medici were discovering that Coligny and the Huguenots, when they had

the upper hand, could be as domineering and tyrannical as the Guises

themselves. Paris was in seething discontent that the beloved Guises were

in disgrace, and Charles found his throne tottering. To add to his fears

from the Catholics, the Huguenot force that had entered Flanders under

Genlis had been routed and destroyed by the Spaniards (19th July), and

it was clear to Catharine and her son, that if they did not promptly cut

themselves free from Elizabeth’s attack on Spanish interests, they would

be dragged down when the Huguenots fell. The very day that the news of

Genlis’ defeat arrived in Paris, a young noble named La Mole was sent

flying to England, ostensibly to confer with the Queen on the Alençon

match. There was no particular reason for roughly breaking off that,

and so offending Elizabeth; but the sending of a mere schoolboy like La

Mole with only vague instructions about the proposed joint action in

Flanders would show that Charles IX. did not intend to take any further

responsibility in that direction.

La Mole arrived in London on 27th July, and had a long midnight

interview with Burghley at the French Embassy. He ostensibly only came

from Alençon—not from the King—and when, a few days afterwards, he saw

the Queen privately at Kenilworth, though he was full of fine lovelorn

compliments from Alençon, he could only say from the King that the latter

could not openly declare himself in the matter of Flanders. He suggested

prudence, and fears of a league of Catholic powers against him. He talked

about the strength of Portugal and Savoy, and generally cried off from

his bargain. This was ill news for Elizabeth, for there were hundreds of

Englishmen in arms in Holland, and brave Sir Humphrey Gilbert and his

band were besieging Ter Goes. But the English Queen made the best of it,

and sought to redress matters by pushing the Alençon match more warmly

than ever, and petting and caressing La Mole, who accompanied her on her

progress towards Windsor. Burghley and the experienced Smith seem to have

been as firmly convinced as young La Mole himself, that the Queen was in

earnest, and would really, at last, make up her mind to marry Alençon.

In her conversations with La Mole and Fénélon she smoothed away all

difficulties. Walsingham had made a great mistake, she said, in declaring

that Alençon’s youth was an insuperable difficulty; and much more to

the same effect. But it is curious that all this artless prattle, all

this coy coquetry of the Queen, so spontaneous in appearance, had in

substance been carefully previously drafted by Burghley, and the drafts

are still at Hatfield. Whilst Charles IX. was hesitating and looking

askance at the dominant Huguenots, the latter were assuring Burghley and

Walsingham that all would be well directly. Henry of Navarre was to be

married to the Princess Margaret, and this would give them a pretext for

gathering so strong a force of their party that they could make the King

do as they pleased.[357]

But Elizabeth and the Huguenots had no monopoly of cunning, and whilst

the billing and cooing with La Mole went on, the massacre of St.

Bartholomew was being secretly planned, and every effort was being made

by the French King to draw England into a position of overt hostility

to Spain, whilst he remained unpledged. The Ambassador, Fénélon, and

young La Mole, left the Queen, and returned to London on the 27th

August. On the same day there arrived at Rye two couriers from Paris,

one from Walsingham to the Queen and Burghley, the other to the French

Ambassador. The French courier was detained, and his papers sent forward

with Walsingham’s despatches to the Queen. The news of the great crime

of St. Bartholomew fell upon Elizabeth and her court like a death-knell;

for it seemed that at last the threatened crusade against Protestantism

had begun, and that England was struck at as well as the Huguenots. All

rejoicings were stopped, mourning garb was assumed, and the gay devices

of masques and mummeries gave way to anxious conferences and plans for

defence. Affrighted Protestants by the thousand came flying across the

Channel in any craft that would sail; from mouth to mouth in England

ran the dreadful story of unprovoked and wanton slaughter, and on

every side the old English feeling of hatred and distrust of the false

Frenchmen came uppermost again. On the 7th September, La Mothe Fénélon

was received by the Queen at Woodstock in dead silence, and surrounded

by all the signs of mourning. He made the best of a bad matter: talked

of a plot of Coligny and the Huguenots to seize the Louvre, urged that

the massacre was unpremeditated, and hoped that the friendship between

France and England would continue uninterrupted. But Elizabeth knew that

such a friendship could only be a snare for her whilst the Guises were

paramount, and she dismissed the Ambassador with a plain indication of

her opinion.

Two days afterwards Burghley penned a long letter from the Council to

Walsingham, dictating the steps to be taken for the protection of English

interests; and he accompanied it by a private note, in which the Lord

Treasurer’s own view is frankly set forth. “I see,” he says, “the devil

is suffered by Almighty God for our sins to be strong in following the

persecution of Christ’s members, and therefore we are not only vigilant

of our own defence against such trayterous attempts as lately have been

put in use there in France, but also to call ourselves to repentance.…

The King assures her Majesty that the navy prepared by Strozzi shall not

in any way endamage her Majestie; but we have great cause in these times

to doubt all fair speeches, and therefore we do presently put all the

sea-coasts in defence, and mean to send her Majesty’s navy to sea with

speed, and so to continue until we see further whereunto to trust.”[358]

Not many days after the massacre, Catharine de Medici saw the mistake

she had made in allowing the Guises a free hand, and she and the King

did their best by protestations to Walsingham, and through Fénélon and

Castelnau de la Mauvissière, to draw closer to Elizabeth again. Alençon

did much more. He went to Walsingham, swore vengeance upon the murderers,

and expressed his intention of escaping from court and secretly flying

to England. By an emissary of his own he sent an extravagant love-letter

to the Queen, and ostentatiously took the Huguenot side, whilst Anjou

was on the side of the League. Elizabeth did not wish to break with

France, for her safety once more depended upon avoiding isolation; but

she was still deeply distrustful. Smith, in sending the Queen’s answer to

Walsingham, quaintly defines her attitude towards the French: “You may

perceive by her Majesty’s answer, that she will not refuse the interview

nor marriage, but yet she cometh near to them _tam timido et suspenso

pede_, that they may have good cause to doubt. The answer to De la Mothe

is _addulced_ so much as may, for she would have it so. You have a

busie piece of work to decypher that which in words is designed to the

extremitie, in deeds is more than manifest; neither you shall open the

one, nor shall they cloak the other. The best is, thank God, we stand

upon our guard, nor I trust shall be taken and killed asleep, as Coligny

was. The greatest matter for her Majestie, and our safety and defence, is

earnestly of us attempted, nor yet achieved, nor utterly in despair, but

rather in hope.”[359]

For the next few months this firm attitude of watchfulness was

maintained, whilst the outward demonstrations of friendship between

Catharine and Elizabeth became gradually more cordial, thanks largely

to the influence in the English court of the special envoy Castelnau

de la Mauvissière. Elizabeth consented to act as sponsor for the French

King’s infant daughter; Alençon’s envoy, Maisonfleur, with the knowledge

of Burghley, sent to his master a plan for his escape to England with

Navarre and Condé, and assured him that the Queen would marry him if

he came. But all this diplomatic finesse did not for a moment stay the

grim determination of the Queen and her Council to provide against

treachery, from whatever quarter it might come. All along the coast the

country stood on guard. Portsmouth, Plymouth, the Thames, and Harwich

were swarming with shipping, armed to the teeth for the succour of stern

Protestant Rochelle against the Catholics, and to aid the Netherlanders

in their struggle.[360] The Huguenots of Guienne, Languedoc, and Gascony

had recovered somewhat from the shock of St. Bartholomew, and were

arming for their defence; and to them also went English money, arms, and

encouragement. At Elizabeth’s court the Vidame de Chartres and the Count

de Montgomerie were honoured guests and busy agents, whilst in France

the young Princes of Navarre and Condé were daily being pledged deeper

to the cause of Protestantism and England. The German princes, too, as

profoundly shocked at the treacherous massacre as Elizabeth herself, drew

nearer to the Queen, who was now regarded throughout Europe as the head

of the Protestant confederacy.

It was soon seen that, though St. Bartholomew had given more power to the

Guises, it had also strengthened and consolidated the reformers rather

than destroyed them. Month after month Anjou, at the head of the Catholic

royal army, cast his men fruitlessly against the impregnable walls of

Rochelle, well supplied as the town was with stores by Montgomerie’s

fleet from England, until at last in the spring of 1573 it was seen by

Catharine and her sons that they had failed to crush the reformers of

France, and they were glad to make terms with the heroic Rochellais,

where the besiegers, plague-stricken, starving, and disheartened, were in

far worse case than the beleaguered. Anjou, to his brothers’ and mother’s

delight, was elected to the vacant throne of Poland, and a full amnesty

was signed for the Huguenots (June 1573); complete religious liberty

being accorded in the towns of Rochelle, Montauban, and Nismes, whilst

private Protestant worship was allowed throughout France.

The Great Lord Burghley: A study in Elizabethan statecraft · 第 10 / 18 章