Policy And Government Of Queen Elizabeth.
Her Foreign Relations (1558-1603).
Elizabeth was at Hatfield when Mary died, a striking proof of the
distrust which reigned between the two sisters, and which
banished one from the death-bed of the other. The princess was
devoting herself, as usual, to the serious occupations which were
dear to her. Still more learned than her sister, brought up with
care by the learned Roger Ascham, Elizabeth had continued the
practice of reading some Greek every day; she even translated the
rhetorician Isocrates. These literary recreations were
interrupted by more urgent cares when the mortal illness of her
sister began to bring about her the worshippers of the rising
sun. Philip II. had been careful to send her a trustworthy
ambassador. The Count of Feria had seen the princess before the
death of the queen, and the king believed her to be gained over
to the great Catholic confederation, and compelled to rely upon
him and to regulate her conduct according to his counsels. She
did not consult him, however, upon the course to be followed,
when she was apprised of the death of her sister. Sir William
Cecil, formerly secretary of state under Edward VI., who being in
disgrace under Mary, had prudently submitted to the Roman
Catholic requirements, had received all his orders by
anticipation.
{325}
Parliament was sitting, Chancellor Heath repaired to the Houses,
and there announced the accession of Queen Elizabeth, "the
legitimate and rightful heir to the throne." Cries were raised of
"Long live Queen Elizabeth!" Couriers were despatched by Cecil to
all the sovereigns of Europe, announcing the accession, and the
Lords hastened to Hatfield, to pay homage to the new sovereign.
They asked her, upon arriving, what attitude she intended to
assume. The Protestants, delivered from an odious yoke, were
rejoicing, being convinced that, under the reign of her sister,
the princess had concealed her real opinions. The Catholics, who
were uneasy, counted upon the influence of Philip II. The first
speech of Elizabeth did not enlighten them; it was cautious and
measured, announcing no intention of abrupt changes. One
indication alone, though slight in itself, soon caused people to
feel from which quarter the wind blew; when the queen arrived at
Highgate, the bishops came to meet her, and all kissed her hand,
with the exception of Bonner, bishop of London, the principal
persecutor of the Reformers, upon whom she turned her back.
Notwithstanding the solemnity of the Catholic services celebrated
in honour of Queen Mary and the Emperor Charles V., who had died
a short time before, discreet observers saw that the queen
inclined towards the party of the Reformation. Her ministers were
yet more decided. Cecil, Pembroke, Northampton, and Lord John
Grey, her intimate councillors, were all convinced of the immense
progress which Protestantism had made during the persecution of
Mary. They perceived, moreover, that the throne of their mistress
rested exclusively upon Protestant principles.
{326}
Subject to the Pope, England must reject Elizabeth as
illegitimate, since the marriage of Henry VIII. with Anne Boleyn
had not been sanctioned by the Catholic Church, and the
succession would be between Lady Catherine Grey, a younger sister
of the unhappy Jane, grand-daughter of Mary Tudor, and Mary
Stuart, queen of Scotland, dauphiness of France, grand-daughter
of Margaret Tudor, wife of James IV., king of Scotland. The
legitimacy of Elizabeth and her right to the throne sprang
naturally from the act of supremacy. On the occasion of the
ceremony of the coronation, on the 15th of January, all the
bishops, with the exception of Doctor Oglethorpe, bishop of
Carlisle, refused to officiate, striking a fatal blow to Roman
Catholic influence in the kingdom by the hostile attitude which
they thus assumed from the outset, either by their own action, or
by orders emanating from Rome. Elizabeth was, however, crowned by
Oglethorpe with all the ancient ceremonies, to the passionate
delight of the populace of London, still in favour of the
Reformation, who followed her through the streets upon her
issuing forth from the Tower, where she had been formerly
detained in terror of death; nosegays rained into her carriage,
and shouts of gladness resounded in all quarters. Elizabeth
received them with that kindly condescension which bound the
hearts of her people to her, smiling when she heard the old men
in the crowd declare that she resembled King Henry. "Be ye well
assured," she said to the multitude that thronged around her at
the Guildhall, "I shall stand your good queen." Amidst many
faults and even crimes, Elizabeth was destined to keep her
promise.
{327}
The Protestants were eager to enjoy their triumph, the more eager
indeed since they were a little uneasy; the queen had preserved
in her chapel a crucifix and a holy-water basin; she had
forbidden controversial preaching and the sermons at Paul's
Cross. These measures were taken in the interest of peace and
concord, it was said, but they did not satisfy the ardour of the
Reformers. Lord Bacon relates that on the morrow of the
coronation, one of the courtiers presented to Elizabeth a
petition in favour of certain prisoners, entreating, since she
had in honour of her accession delivered several captives, that
she would please also to release the apostle Paul and the four
evangelists so long detained in prison, in a foreign tongue, so
that they could not converse with the common people. The queen
gravely replied that it would be necessary first to ascertain of
them whether it was agreeable to them to be released. She had,
however, already authorized the reading of the liturgy in
English; a commission of theologians were secretly entrusted to
revise the Prayer-Book of Edward VI., before restoring it to use.
Elizabeth did not approve of all the reforms practised by
Cranmer; the English who had taken refuge abroad on account of
their religion, and who had returned to England at her accession
with a zeal increased by persecution, would soon have drawn the
Church of England into a path which was not hers, if the secret
tendencies of Elizabeth towards Roman Catholicism and her
resolution to maintain the royal prerogative had not
energetically resisted their influence. When Parliament met, on
the 25th of January, 1559, the queen made no proclamation,
leaving to Cecil and the keeper of the seals, Nicholas Bacon
(father of the great Chancellor Bacon), the duty of making known
her wishes.
{328}
She allowed the bill of supremacy and the restoration of the
tithes and annates to the crown to be proposed and voted. She
allowed the laws of King Edward concerning religion to be put in
force again as well as the prayer-book as modified by her orders,
but the law for the reinstatement of the married clergy
interdicted under the reign of Mary, was set aside by her desire.
She was never able to approve of the marriage of priests. She
also discountenanced the project for a code of canon law, being
uneasy, no doubt, concerning the discussions which might spring
from it. This double check dissatisfied the party ardent for the
Reformation. Elizabeth subsequently asserted that the Protestants
had impelled her in her course at the moment of beginning her
reign. She took credit to herself; Parliament had not yet raised
its head. It was under the prolonged influence of the Reformation
that it was destined to foster noble instincts of liberty, and
even at times to triumph over the firm will of Elizabeth.
Everything depended upon the marriage of the queen, and of this
all parties were sensible. The great bulk of the nation were not
so anxious about the selection of a husband as about the husband
himself. They ardently desired to see the succession assured, and
in the first session of Parliament in 1559, a deputation
presented themselves before the queen at Whitehall, with the
message, that the Commons conjured her Grace to think of
marriage, in order that her posterity might reign over the
kingdom.
{329}
It was the first time that Elizabeth proclaimed that aversion to
marriage which was definitely to triumph over so many assaults
and momentary hesitations. "From my years of understanding,
knowing myself a servitor of Almighty God," she said, "I chose
this kind of life in which I do yet live as a life most
acceptable unto Him, wherein I thought I could best serve Him,
and with most quietness do my duty unto Him." Then, laying stress
in a few sentences upon the difficulties which she had overcome
under the reign of her sister, in remaining faithful to her
resolution, she added, without promising the Commons to marry,
that she would never choose any but a husband as devoted as
herself to the happiness of her people. "I take your petition in
good part, for it is simple and containeth no limitation of place
or person. If it had been otherwise, I must have misliked it very
much, and thought it in you a very great presumption, being unfit
and altogether unmeet to require them that may command. And for
me, it shall be sufficient that a marble stone declare that a
queen, having reigned such time, lived and died a virgin." The
Commons retired without having obtained anything definite. The
same demand was to be repeated many times, and to receive answers
of a very different kind; but until the end of her life Elizabeth
took pleasure in keeping the world in suspense by her grave
coquetries, in the expectation of a marriage which she never
seriously desired.
{330}
While Parliament was imploring the queen to take a husband, the
King of Spain. Philip II., solemnly determined, by a
conscientious sacrifice, to do her the supreme honour of offering
his hand. Being resolved to preserve the place which he had
acquired in England, and to retain that powerful kingdom in the
bosom of the Catholic Church, he had written to Feria on the 10th
of January, 1559, enumerating the objections which might be made
to his union with his sister-in-law, and the inconveniences and
sacrifices which must result from the step; but by an act of
magnanimity of which he was the first to be convinced, Philip had
resolved to set aside all obstacles. "You will understand in this
what service I render to our Lord; through me her allegiance will
be regained to the Church." Philip ended by settling beforehand
all the conditions to which Elizabeth was to conform--all the
submissions which she was to make to the Pope and to the Church,
before being in a position to aspire to the elevation which he
destined for her. Paul IV. had ill-prepared the way for the
contrition of Queen Elizabeth. In the first days of her
accession, when that event had been communicated to the Holy See,
as well as to all the sovereigns of Europe, the Pope abruptly
replied that, the Princess being illegitimate, she was to beware
of laying hands upon the crown, and to lay down the sceptre as
soon as possible until he should have declared concerning her
rights. This claim had not inclined the queen to appreciate the
generous sacrifice of Philip; she meekly rejected the advances of
the Count of Feria, asserting that the friendship of her brother
of Spain was as dear to her as his love could be, and that the
Pope himself could not unite her to the husband of her sister.
Feria spoke of the Queen of Scotland. Elizabeth did not suffer
herself to be frightened, and without positively refusing the
honour which the King of Spain did her, she said laughingly, that
she was afraid he might be a bad husband, since he would come to
England simply to marry her, but would not sojourn there with
her.
{331}
The confidential letters of Philip had transpired: Feria
understood that the definite reply would be unfavourable, but
Elizabeth loaded the ambassador with attentions. A peace with
France was negotiating at Cambray, and the queen who yet hoped to
recover Calais, wanted the support of Philip for this important
business. When peace was at length signed at Cateau-Cambresis and
the violence of English resentment was appeased, on the 2nd of
April, by the promise of the surrender of Calais at the end of
eight years, Philip II. transferred to another Elizabeth the
honour which he intended for his sister-in-law, by marrying the
young Elizabeth of France, daughter of Henry II. "My name brings
good-fortune." said the Queen of England on learning, not without
ill-humor, the conditions of the treaty, with that singular
coquetry which impelled her all her life to make use of every
means to retain around her the suitors to whom she would grant
nothing. The alliance between England and Spain still continued.
"You will assure the queen that I remain her good friend," wrote
Philip II. to Feria. He feared that she would turn towards the
court of France, which was making great advances towards her. He
might have reassured himself. France was then represented, in the
eyes of Elizabeth, by Mary Stuart, and that princess had
committed a mistake for ever ineffaceable in the eyes of
Elizabeth, by quartering upon her escutcheon the arms of England
with those of Scotland and France. The dauphin, in confirming the
treaty, had also taken the title of King of England, Scotland,
and Ireland, a fatal pretension which was to engender many
crimes.
{332}
Parliament was dissolved when Elizabeth called upon the bishops
to conform themselves to the laws which had recently been
re-established. All refused with the exception of Kitchen, bishop
of Llandaff, formerly a Benedictine, whose habit it was to adopt
at all times the religious belief of his sovereign. A certain
number of dignitaries of the Church followed the example of the
bishops, who found among the lower orders of the clergy very few
adherents. Several bishoprics were vacant at the accession of
Elizabeth. She gave pensions to a few of the clergy who retired
on account of their religion, and provided for all the livings by
placing in them the greater number of the exiles driven forth by
the fanaticism of Mary. The Church of England was for ever lost
to the Holy See, whatever hopes the Catholics might conceive in
the future. The two statutes generally known under the names of
the "Act of Supremacy," and the "Act of Uniformity," debarred
from all public offices the conscientious Catholics who refused
to recognise the religious authority of the queen, and at the
same time prohibited the practice of their worship. Then began
for the Catholics a silent, minute, continual persecution,
penetrating into families, maintained by espionage, always
vexatious, sometimes outrageous, mingling with politics and
drawing therefrom the pretext for tyranny. This oppression did
not break forth at first; it was in 1561 that Sir Edward
Waldegrave and his wife were sent to the Tower for having
entertained in their house a Catholic priest.
{333}
The bishops themselves were at first simply deposed; but their
intemperate zeal having led some, towards the end of 1559, into
presenting a petition which implored the queen to follow the
example of her sister, of blessed memory, Elizabeth, greatly
incensed, sent the petitioners to prison. Bonner was detained
there until his death. The other prelates were at length released
and even installed, sometimes with the Protestant bishops who had
succeeded them, at other times with the rich clergy, to the great
displeasure of both. The monasteries, recently reopened by Mary,
were once more closed, and the crown again took possession of the
property of the Church, which had been returned under the last
reign. In the main, and notwithstanding a few modifications, the
work of Cranmer and Edward VI. was restored. The opinion of the
majority of the nation, and prudent policy, had overcome, in the
mind of Elizabeth, her personal tastes and tendencies.
Political motives were about to unite her more and more with the
Protestants of Europe. When she learned of the impertinent
pretension of the dauphin to the title of King of England, she
exclaimed, "I will take a husband who shall cause the head of the
King of France to ache; he does not know what a rebuff I intend
to give him." The queen had attributed to her the intention of
uniting herself to the Earl of Arran, son of the former regent of
Scotland, now known under the French title of Duke of
Chatelleraut, heir presumptive to the throne of Scotland after
the Stuarts. The Earl of Arran had ardently embraced the
Protestant faith, and was in London in 1559, at the moment when
Mary Stuart mortally offended "her good sister of England."
{334}
He had a secret interview with the queen at Hampton Court, and
immediately set out, under an assumed name, for Scotland,
accompanied by Randolph, a confidential emissary of Elizabeth.
The condition of Scotland had become both complicated and
aggravated by the death of the King of France, Henry II. Francis
II., the husband of Mary Stuart, had determined, it was said, to
expend all the property of France, if necessary, to put an end to
the insurrection. It was to the support of the insurgents that
the Protestant policy, then represented by Cecil, wished to
pledge Queen Elizabeth, in order to bring about the marriage with
the Earl of Arran, who had become King of Scotland, and that
union of the two crowns which Henry VIII. had contemplated by the
marriage of Edward VI. with Mary Stuart.
Nowhere had the Catholic Church offered so many vulnerable points
to the Reformers as in Scotland, for nowhere were the clergy so
corrupt. The Protestant doctrines, in their most austere and
aggressive forms, had made such great progress there, that Knox
may be regarded as the real chief of the insurrection which
everywhere held the regent, Mary of Guise, in check. The violence
of religious passions had already occasioned the destruction of a
great number of churches and monasteries; the greater part of the
nobility had abandoned the regent, to form themselves into a
"Congregation of the Lord," under the direction of Lord James
Stuart, an illegitimate son of James V., and a brother of Mary
Stuart.
{335}
The troops from France alone allowed the regent to struggle
against the insurgents; but the reinforcements were numerous and
efficient. A French garrison had taken possession of Leith and
threatened Edinburgh, when the agents of Queen Elizabeth set
themselves to work, Randolph in Scotland, Sir Ralph Sadler at
Berwick, where he was officially entrusted to negotiate with the
delegates of the regent concerning the question of outrages upon
the borders. The negotiations with the Lords of the Congregation
were taking their course, still profoundly secret. Elizabeth was
naturally parsimonious, and she had found the finances of England
in great disorder. At the instigation of Cecil, however, she sent
to Sadler considerable sums for the support of the malcontents.
No blows had been struck since the recent arrangement between the
regent and the great noblemen, and it was not until the month of
October, 1559, that the insurgents laid siege to Leith. Hitherto
Elizabeth had resolutely denied all relations with the Lords of
the Congregation; but one of her agents were arrested, having in
his possession a sum of two thousand pounds sterling. The
hesitations and doubts of the queen often impeded the action of
Cecil. She had no liking for the ardent Presbyterians. Knox, in
particular, was odious to her; she had never forgiven him for a
pamphlet upon female government, entitled, _The First Blast of
the Trumpet against the monstrous Regiment of Women_, "I like
not the audacity of Knox, whom you have well brought down in your
answer," wrote Cecil to Sadler; "it does us no good here, and I
suppress it as much as I can; however, fail not to send me what
he writes." The subsidies did not suffice to maintain courage and
discipline in the Scottish army.
{336}
Being repulsed before Leith, the Lords of the Congregation
evacuated Edinburgh, and retired during the night to Stirling.
Elizabeth resolved to adopt more efficacious measures. On the
27th of February, 1560, through the agency of Maitland of
Lethington, formerly secretary of the queen regent, and who had
gone over to the insurgent party, she concluded a treaty of
alliance with the great Scottish noblemen, for the whole duration
of the marriage of the Queen of Scotland with the King of France,
undertaking not to lay down arms as long as the French should
remain in Scotland. An English army crossed the frontier, under
the orders of Lord Grey of Wilton; an English fleet, commanded by
Winter, entered the Firth of Forth; and the Lords of the
Congregation having assembled all their forces, siege was laid to
Leith, on the 6th of April. The siege was still in progress on
the 10th of June, when the Queen Regent, Mary of Guise, expired
in Edinburgh Castle, where Lord Erskine had received her, as upon
neutral ground. This death precipitated the conclusion of a peace
desired by both parties. The French surrendered Leith, and went
aboard their vessel again, thus delivering Scotland from their
presence; and a council of twelve noblemen, chosen partly by the
queen, partly by Parliament, was entrusted to govern the country
in the absence of the sovereign. The court of France recognized
the right of Queen Elizabeth to the throne, and her good sister
Mary gave up bearing the arms of England. The treaty of Edinburgh
secured in Scotland the supremacy of Protestantism, which had
become the religion of the majority of the population.
{337}
The vote of the Scottish Parliament, in the month of August,
1560, officially severed all bonds with the court of Rome, by
adopting a confession of faith drawn up by Knox and his
disciples, according to the doctrines of Calvin, and striking the
ecclesiastical organization at its basis, no less than the
religious practices of Catholicism. Matters stood thus, when the
Parliament deigned to think of the assent of the queen. Sir James
Sandilands, formerly Prior of the Hospitallers, was dispatched to
France to demand a ratification, which was immediately refused.
It was said that the uncles of Mary, the Duke of Guise and the
Cardinal of Lorraine, were making preparations for an invasion in
Scotland, when the young King of France, Francis II., expired
suddenly, on the 5th of December, 1560, after the reign of
seventeen months. The power of Mary Stuart was suddenly eclipsed;
the bright morning of her life was about to disappear behind a
dark cloud heavy with misfortunes and with crimes.
While Mary, but lately queen of France, was preparing to return
to her cold and rugged country, Elizabeth was keeping in check
the suitors who were contending for her hand. The King of Sweden,
who had been ambitious of the honour of becoming her husband when
he was but heir apparent, and when she was watched at Hatfield by
the spies of her sister, despatched his brother, the Duke of
Finland, to renew his offer. The ambassador was courteously
received, and treated with distinction by the queen; but scarcely
had he been installed by order of Elizabeth in the bishop's
palace at Southwark, when the King of Denmark sent his nephew,
the Duke of Holstein, as a claimant to the same honour.
{338}
"It is said that the Archduke Philip is on the way here," wrote
Cecil, "without pomp, and, so to say, in secret. The King of
Spain supports him warmly; I would, in God's name, that her
Majesty might accept one, and that the rest should be honourably
sent back." The Archduke Charles, son of the Emperor Ferdinand,
did not come; like Elizabeth herself, he hesitated. The King of
Sweden was not easily put off with refusals, but the Duke of
Finland was obliged to quit without having obtained anything. The
Duke of Holstein at least carried away, for his uncle, the Order
of the Garter, and a pension for himself. The queen was making
sport of all these suitors, taking pleasure in keeping them upon
the alert by her coquetry, but more tenderly concerned for a
young nobleman of her court than with all the princes who were
seeking her alliance. For several months past the attention of
the courtiers had been excited by the signal favour which she
manifested towards Lord Robert Dudley, son of the Duke of
Northumberland and brother of Lord Guilford Dudley, husband of
Lady Jane Grey. The passing fancy which Elizabeth had displayed
for Sir William Pickering and Lord Arundel, had given place to a
more durable attachment. Lord Robert, subsequently known in
history under the title of the Earl of Leicester, had taken
possession of the heart of the queen. He nourished the hope of
marrying her, but he had a wife, whom he kept in a secluded spot
in the country. One day she fell down a staircase and broke her
neck, without any one being a witness of the accident. Court
rumours were unfavourable to Lord Robert. He was loudly accused
of having caused the death of his wife, and the queen felt how
much public opinion in England was opposed to her desire to marry
the man whom she loved.
{339}
Mary Stuart had returned to Scotland. Elizabeth, still uneasy at
the claims of her rival to the crown, had tartly refused an
authorization to pass through her dominions, which Mary had asked
for, and the bitter feeling which had always existed between the
princesses had only increased. The Lords of the Congregation had
invoked the support of the Queen of England, when Mary Stuart
refused to ratify the separation which they had determined upon
between Scotland and Rome. Upon leaving, with regret, that France
in which she had been reared, the young queen had scarcely set
foot in her kingdom when she encountered the violent opposition
of her subjects to the worship which she had sincerely at heart.
Her Roman Catholic friends, among others the Bishop of Ross, had
urged her to land in the Highlands, and surrounding herself with
the forces of the Earl of Huntley, a fervent Catholic, to repair
at once to Edinburgh. She rejected this clumsy proposal, which
placed her at the outset in contention with the majority of the
nation, and the plaudits of the population greeted her at Leith,
on the 19th of August; but, on the first Sunday after her arrival
when the fierce Protestants saw the altar prepared in Holyrood
Chapel, an outcry was raised against the mass, and Lord James
Stuart was obliged to remain before the door of the chapel, with
his sword drawn during the whole time of the service, in order to
prevent any scandal. He did not contrive to prevent a visit from
Knox.
{340}
The ardent and indomitable preacher repaired to the residence of
the queen, now urging her by formal solicitations, now loading
her with reproaches. Mary wept; but she refused to listen any
longer to Knox, and the Reformer acquired the habit of referring
to her from the pulpit under the name of Jezebel. The abyss was
already beginning to open between Mary Stuart and her people; the
crimes of both were about to render the evil irreparable.
Queen Elizabeth had opened negotiations for persuading her good
sister of Scotland to publicly renounce all claim to the crown of
England, but Mary demanded to be recognized as the second person
of the kingdom, heiress to the throne in case of the death of
Elizabeth without issue. The queen would not admit this claim;
she experienced an inexpressible repugnance towards settling the
succession after her decease. Mary Stuart was not destined to be
the only sufferer from this mean jealousy. Elizabeth was at times
more than a man, as her minister, Robert Cecil, son of the great
Burleigh, said subsequently, but she also became sometimes less
than a woman. She had conceived suspicions concerning Lady
Catharine Grey, sister of Lady Jane, and heiress to her rights,
such as they were. It was discovered that Lady Catharine had
secretly married Lord Hertford, son of the Duke of Somerset,
formerly Protector. She was imprisoned in the Tower, as though
she had conspired against the life and power of the queen. Her
husband was travelling in France; he was peremptorily recalled
and thrown into prison in his turn. The marriage was declared
null, and the child that had recently been born to this pair was
stamped as illegitimate.
{341}
Without any other pretext than state reasons the husband and wife
were detained in the Tower, where Lady Catharine Grey died in
1569. The same cause had already cost the lives of two daughters
of the Duchess of Suffolk; the third was shortly afterwards to
pay, like them, for the royal blood which ran in her veins.
Arthur and Anthony Pole, nephews of the Cardinal, had made a vain
attempt in favour of Queen Mary, whom there was a project it is
said, for marrying to one of the two brothers, when they should
have placed her upon the throne of England; but the queen felt no
uneasiness from this source, and she pardoned all the accused
persons. She could not, however, conceal from herself that the
Catholic princes in general looked upon her with distrust, and
would willingly seek a pretext in the illegitimacy of her birth
to conspire against her in favour of the Queen of Scotland. This
secret motive, far more than her religious convictions, lead her
to maintain abroad the cause of the oppressed Protestants, who
turned their eyes towards the Queen of England. In France, the
Reformers, under the orders of the Prince of Condé and the
Admiral de Coligny, had risen at the beginning of 1562, upon the
violation by the Duke of Guise of the recent treaties and the
massacre of the Protestants at Vassy. They immediately claimed
the assistance of Queen Elizabeth. Philip II., who had sent six
thousand men to support the Duke of Guise, advised him to keep
out of the quarrel and to remain neutral; but Elizabeth had
adopted the theory, that she was seconding the wishes of the King
of France, by fighting against the Guises, who endeavoured to
tyrannize over him.
{342}
Under this pretext, she sent three thousand men to France, with
instructions to take possession of Havre, as a pledge for the
good intentions of the Huguenots towards her. At the same time
she furnished money to the prince of Condé. An English detachment
sent to the assistance of the besieged people in Rouen, was cut
to pieces, after the capture of the town. But the garrison of
Havre had been reinforced; the Earl of Warwick, brother of Lord
Robert Dudley, was in command of the town; he remained firm for
nine months both against treachery and the armies of the French.
He only yielded to the plague, when infection had thinned his
forces. Wounded and ill himself, he was concerned only for the
fate of the soldiers whom he brought back when he returned to
England in the month of July, 1563, bringing with him the
pestilence which had triumphed over all his efforts. Thousands of
victims succumbed to the plague which ravaged London during the
months of September and October. Elizabeth was negotiating with
Queen Catharine of Medicis. The Protestants had been vanquished,
but the Duke of Guise was dead, assassinated by Poltrot. Peace
was signed on the 11th of April, 1564, at Troves, and the last
hope of regaining Calais vanished with the departure of the
hostages whom France had given shortly before; Elizabeth received
in exchange the sum of a hundred and twenty thousand crowns, a
sum very useful to her treasury, which was then empty.
{343}
The Parliament of England had, nevertheless, voted considerable
subsidies in the preceding year, not without repeating its
constant request in favour of the marriage of the queen. The
Commons had added on this occasion another petition, which
sounded ill in the royal ears. In the event of her Grace having
decided for ever against marriage, she was implored to permit
Parliament to designate and recognize her legitimate successor.
Once more Elizabeth led her people to hope that she was thinking
of marriage. She was then engaged in the Scottish intrigues
respecting the marriage of Mary Stuart, more probable, although
as much debated as her own. Religious and political parties
continued to rend Scotland asunder. The Catholics, under the
order of the Earl of Huntly, had been defeated at Corrichie by
the Earl of Murray, formerly Lord James Stuart, at the head of
the Protestants. It was constantly repeated that such or such a
one of the great opposing noblemen aspired to the hand of Queen
Mary, and they were not the only aspirants. Her beauty, her
charms, and the prospect of the crown of England added to the
crown of Scotland, drew upon her the eyes and the ambitious hopes
of a crowd of princes. The King of Spain proposed his son and
heir Don Carlos, and the treaty had been sufficiently advanced by
the care of the skilful ambassador of Philip in London, the
Bishop of Quadra. When that prelate died, the negotiations
relaxed [and] the Guises spoke of the Duke of Anjou, subsequently
Henry III., of the Duke of Ferrara, and of several others; but
all these claimants were Catholics, the Scottish nation was
hostile to them, and Queen Elizabeth did not conceal the fact
that any union with a foreign prince, opening up to her enemies
the road to her dominions, would bring about war.
{344}
A personal interview had been projected between the two queens.
Mary was, it was said, desirous of consulting her good sister and
of proceeding according to her advice, but Elizabeth, vain as she
may have been and whatever care she may have taken to cause her
beauty to be exalted by her courtiers, at the expense of the
charms of her rival, had no wish to face the comparison; the two
princesses never saw each other. The Queen of England, meanwhile,
proposed for the husband of Mary Stuart, the man whom she herself
loved, Lord Robert Dudley, whom she soon raised to the rank of
Earl of Leicester. Did she act sincerely? Did she seriously wish
to make the fortune of Leicester through the hands of Mary, when
politics and her personal scruples did not allow her to raise him
to her own level? None will ever know this; but the negotiations
were renewed several times, Elizabeth continuing to insist upon
marrying the Queen of Scotland to a great English nobleman, and
refusing to hear of any but Leicester. People spoke of Lord
Darnley, the eldest son of the Earl of Lennox, and grandson, by
his mother, of Lady Margaret Douglas, of the Earl of Angus and of
Margaret Tudor, Queen of Scotland, and aunt of Elizabeth. He was,
therefore, cousin-german to Mary Stuart, and his father, for a
long while exiled from Scotland, whither he had recently
returned, had immediately undertaken to bring about his marriage
with the queen. His birthplace was in England, and he was an
English subject, but Elizabeth did not favour his pretensions.
Resting her hand upon the shoulder of Leicester, she said to
Melville, the skilful and faithful envoy of Mary Stuart, "What do
you think of this man? Is he not a good servant? And,
nevertheless, you prefer that stripling to him?" referring to
Darnley who bore the sword of justice before her.
{345}
Notwithstanding these objections, Darnley arrived in Scotland at
the beginning of the year 1565. and was received kindly by Queen
Mary. He was handsome and of good figure; his mother was skilful
and intriguing. The confidants of Mary were all gained over; the
queen was not opposed to this union. Lord Murray, who counted
upon retaining power, counselled the marriage; Parliament did
likewise. Queen Elizabeth was informed of what was happening and
her anger was violent. Cecil still hoped that Mary Stuart would
marry Leicester and so ward off from the head of his mistress the
danger of a union which constantly occupied his thoughts. The
grave objections of her "good sister" were made known to the
Queen of Scotland. Elizabeth went further; the property which the
Lennoxes possessed in England was confiscated, and the Countess
of Lennox and her second son were sent to the Tower. Sir Nicholas
Throgmorton, in whom Elizabeth had confidence was despatched to
Scotland, to intrigue with the Lords of the Congregation; they
were by slow degrees separating themselves from Mary, and Murray
was the first to blame what he had himself advised a short time
before. The preachers thundered against the possibility of a
union with a Roman Catholic king. Mary was solemnly invited by
the assembly of the Church to conform herself to the Protestant
faith, by abolishing everywhere in her dominions the Catholic
worship.
{346}
Plot succeeded plot, but Mary was, she said, too much involved to
draw back, and on the 12th of July, Darnley, whom the queen had
recently raised to the rank of Earl of Ross and Duke of Rothsay,
married Mary Stuart in Holyrood Chapel. He was proclaimed king at
the Cross in the market-place of Edinburgh. The Earl of Murray
and the greater part of the Lords of the Congregation immediately
rose in insurrection; but before they were able to assemble their
forces, the queen marched upon them at the head of the royal
army, and with pistols at her saddle-bow. The lords turned their
horses' heads and retired without fighting. Lord Murray and the
Duke of Chatellerault only stopped in their flight when they had
crossed the frontier. They were ill-received by Elizabeth, though
she had encouraged them in their revolt, for she liked neither
the insurgents nor those who were vanquished, and she did not
intervene in their favour with Mary, who had caused a bill of
attainder to be declared by her Parliament against the chiefs of
the insurrection. At the same time, Mary committed the error to
which she had for a long time been solicited by her uncles of
Guise. She united herself to the great Catholic alliance formed
several years before between France and Spain, and renewed, it
was said, at Bayonne, in 1564. The continual difficulties caused
by the rebellions of the great nobles, and by the intrigues of
England, naturally tended to throw Mary into the arms of the
Catholic sovereigns; it was a fatal blunder on the part of the
Queen of Scotland, but her guilt was of another kind.
[Image]
Mary, Queen Of Scots.
{347}
Darnley was both incompetent and unmannerly, violent and weak.
The affection which he had inspired in Mary Stuart soon
disappeared and gave place to contempt. She has been accused of
worse still; the niece of the Guises, brought up by Catherine of
Medicis, amidst all the disorder of morals which reigned at the
court of France, had a bad reputation among the austere
Presbyterians; they attributed the most unworthy motives to the
elegant tastes for frivolous pastimes which led the queen to
surround herself with young men, with foreigners and artists. No
one was more suspected among the favourites of Mary than an
Italian, David Rizzio, who had won her good graces by his musical
talents, and to whom she had gradually confided important trusts.
Rizzio had especially aroused the jealousy of Darnley; the
Italian had, it was said, taken the liberty of reproaching the
young king with his behaviour towards Mary; he also encouraged
the queen in her refusal to confer upon Darnley the crown as her
consort instead of the vain title which he bore. A plot was
hatched against the life of Rizzio. At the head of the
conspirators was Lord Ruthven, who had been a short time before
in a dying condition, and who arose from his sick-bed to take
part in a deed of blood with Lord Morton, chancellor of the
kingdom. Their aim was to recall the Earl of Murray and the
exiled lords, by revoking the acts passed against them by
Parliament.
{348}
On the 9th of March, 1566, Mary was supping in her apartment with
her ladies, and Rizzio was in the room, when the young king came
to the palace, followed by Ruthven. The queen rose in alarm, for
the other conspirators had just entered. Ruthven ordered Rizzio
to leave the chamber, but Mary placed herself before her
favourite, who clung to her dress. Darnley seized the hands of
his wife; the table was overthrown; the unhappy Italian cried,
"Mercy! justice! justice!" George Douglas drew the dagger of
Darnley, and struck the secretary. Andrew Ket, one of the
conspirators, presented his pistol close to the body of the
queen, who implored them to spare Rizzio. He was dragged out, and
was pierced by numerous dagger-thrusts in the antechamber, while
Morton guarded the doors of the palace with a troop of armed men.
When Mary heard that Rizzio was dead, she stood erect. "I will
now dry up my tears," she said, "and I will think of revenge."
Darnley endeavoured to console the queen; she suffered him to
believe that she accepted his excuses, and when his brother, Lord
Murray, presented himself on the morrow at Holyrood, with the
banished noblemen, she received him without anger, and contrived
to detach him from those who had exerted themselves on his
behalf, perhaps without his knowledge. Morton and Ruthven,
abandoned by Darnley and Murray, immediately took to flight,
while the Earl of Bothwell and Lord Huntley were bringing to the
queen an army of eighteen thousand men, that they had immediately
levied. Mary was once more mistress of the situation. Two obscure
accomplices in the murder of Rizzio alone bore the penalty of the
crime, and on the 9th of June, 1566, the queen gave birth to a
son, who was to become James VI. of Scotland, and James I. of
England. Elizabeth had promised to act as godmother to the child
of the Queen of Scotland. When the prince was born, Melville
departed in all haste, to bear the news to London.
[Image]
"George Douglass Seized Darnley's Dagger And Struck Rizzio."
{349}
Cecil was the first informed; he repaired to Greenwich; the queen
was dancing after supper. "But," wrote Melville, "when the
secretary of state whispered in her ear of the birth of a Prince,
the merriment disappeared for the evening. Everybody was
astonished at the change, but the queen sank into a chair, with
her hand upon her cheek, saying to her ladies that the Queen of
Scotland was the mother of a fine boy, while she was but a barren
stem." On the morrow, Elizabeth had regained her composure, and
she graciously congratulated the ambassador, despatching the Earl
of Bedford to Scotland with her gifts, to be present at the
baptism of the little prince. Darnley did not wish to take part
in the ceremony; he knew that the Queen of England had forbidden
her emissaries to bestow royal honours upon him.
He had, besides, other causes for dissatisfaction. A growing
coldness existed between his wife and himself. The apparent
reconcilliation which had followed the murder of Rizzio, had not
lasted long, and Darnley thought of going away from Scotland, and
travelling upon the Continent. Queen Mary had addressed a letter
to the privy council of Elizabeth, claiming the recognition of
her hereditary rights, a matter which had recently been mooted in
the English Parliament, to the great exasperation of her Majesty.
The Commons had even insisted more than usual, notwithstanding
the ordinary promise of the queen to think of marriage. Elizabeth
had recently been ill, and the terrors of a contested succession
had drawn forth the deputies from their ordinary state of
submission.
{350}
When the request of Mary arrived, the queen of England abruptly
imposed silence upon the Commons. "Under the pretexts of marriage
and succession, many amongst you conceal hostile intentions," she
said, "but I have learnt to distinguish my friends from my
enemies, and take care, whoever be the sovereign who holds the
reins of government, not to wear out his patience as you have
done mine." She gave instructions to the Earl of Bedford to
induce Mary to ratify the treaty of Edinburgh, which yet remained
pending, and which contained verbally, the renunciation of the
rights which Mary claimed, promising to regulate the question of
the succession by a fresh treaty. Mary refused, but, in order not
to exasperate her powerful rival, she consented at the request of
Bedford to pardon Morton, Ruthven, and Lindsay, who had taken
refuge in England after the murder of Rizzio. Darnley no doubt
conceived fears at the news of the return of Morton, for he
immediately left the court and sought retirement at the residence
of the Earl of Lennox near Glasgow.
Scarcely had the young king arrived at his father's house when he
caught the small-pox. He was in great danger, and the queen sent
her physician to him, without going to see him herself, as long
as he was seriously ill. She remembered, no doubt, that while in
a dying condition the preceding summer, at Jedburgh, her husband
had not troubled himself to go and see her. When Darnley was
convalescent, Mary consented to a fresh reconciliation. She
repaired to Glasgow and took the king with her to Edinburgh.
{351}
She took up her residence as usual at Holyrood, but the fear of
infection caused Darnley to be installed in an isolated house,
where the queen went to see him. Rumours of conspiracy were
already afloat; the insolent Darnley had few friends and many
enemies. He was, however, warned by the Earl of Orkney that if he
did not promptly quit this place, he would lose his life there,
but the king had been smitten again with a capricious passion for
his wife. He only saw through his eyes, and a word from the mouth
of Mary soon quieted his suspicions. On the 9th of February,
1567, the queen supped with him, then left him at eleven o'clock
for a ball which she was giving at Holyrood, in honour of the
marriage of one of her servants. Three hours after her departure,
at two o'clock in the morning, the house in which Darnley was
alone with five servants, was suddenly blown up, and the body of
the unhappy king was found in the garden, beside that of a page,
without trace of burning or of any violence, while the other
victims remained buried beneath the rubbish. No one had escaped.
The blow had been struck by a sure hand. Mary was again a widow.
The public voice immediately accused the Earl of Bothwell. His
violent passion for the queen was known; it was even whispered
that it was mutual, notwithstanding the signs of grief shown by
Mary, who remained shut up in an apartment hung with black. The
details of the crime indicated long premeditation and skilful
accomplices. Nearly all the ministers of the queen, Maitland
especially, were implicated in the suspicions of the public.
Nobody laid hands upon the principal person accused, even when
the Earl of Lennox demanded his arrest.
{352}
He was allowed to take possession of Edinburgh Castle before a
warrant of arrest was granted against him. He appeared at the bar
of the court of justice, but rather in triumph than as an accused
person. The Earl of Lennox, alarmed at the attitude of the
assassins of his son, had fled and taken refuge in England.
Bothwell was acquitted, and bore the sceptre before the queen at
the opening of Parliament. Darnley had been sleeping only one
month in his bloody tomb, and already the rumour was afloat that
the queen was about to marry the Earl of Bothwell, whom general
opinion regarded as the murderer of her husband. Bothwell had
been married six months before to the sister of the Earl of
Huntley.
In the midst of this court agitated by such violent passions and
tainted by such dark acts of treachery, the queen had a few
faithful friends, and these warned her of the sinister rumours
which circulated concerning her. Her honest envoy, Melville,
relates how he took her a letter from England upon this subject;
the queen showed it to the Secretary Maitland: "Bothwell will
kill you," said the politician; "retire before he comes within
this place." And, as Melville persisted, the queen sharply
replied that matters had not yet come to that, although she
refused to go into details.
Bothwell had, however, taken his precautions and secured powerful
partisans. He brought together at a banquet all the principal
members of Parliament, and there, protesting his innocence of the
murder of Darnley, he announced his intention of marrying the
queen. Whether from fear or from promises of advantage, the
guests signed a document which Bothwell produced, recommending
the earl for the husband of Mary, and they undertook to favour
the marriage by every means.
{353}
Four days later Bothwell gathered together a thousand horses. He
planted himself in the way of the queen, who was returning from
Stirling, between Linlithgow and Edinburgh, where she had been to
see the little prince. He fell upon the royal escort, and himself
laying hands upon the bridle of Mary's horse, he dragged her,
with her principal councillors, into Dunbar Castle, exclaiming at
the moment of the capture, "that he would marry the queen,
whether people wished it or not, whether she wished it herself or
not," he detained her for five days in the fortress, without her
subjects attempting the slightest effort to deliver her. On the
29th of April, when she was restored to liberty, the queen
appeared before the session court, announcing with shame that
notwithstanding the outrages which the Earl of Bothwell had made
her suffer, she was disposed to pardon him and to raise him to
fresh honours. On the 15th of May, the marriage was celebrated
publicly at Holyrood, according to the Protestant rites, and in
private according to the Catholic rites. Bothwell had legally
separated himself from his wife; the murderer had obtained the
object of his crime.
Hitherto silence had been preserved as to the guilt of Bothwell,
but the public conscience was shocked by the marriage. At the
same time burst forth the plots which had long been in
preparation to hurl Mary from the throne. Scarcely had she,
whether willingly or under compulsion, concluded this odious
union, when revolt suddenly threw off its mask.
{354}
The great nobles had signed the engagement of Bothwell; now they
loudly accused him of the murder of Darnley, manifested their
fears for the life of the little prince, and announced the
intention of delivering the queen from the yoke of her husband.
An attempt to take possession of Bothwell's person having failed,
the confederates marched upon Edinburgh, where they seized the
government; but Mary rarely shrank from violence; she was
resolute and quick; on the 15th of June, a month after her
marriage, she was at Carbery Hill at the head of the troops that
she had raised, in the face of the army of the insurgents. No
blows were struck. The ambassador of France, the aged Le Croc,
endeavoured to negotiate between the two parties. The forces of
the confederates increased every moment; the soldiers of the
queen appeared valiant. Bothwell proposed single combat to the
hostile chiefs. Several accepted, but without result. It was at
length agreed to allow Bothwell to proceed without obstacle,
provided the queen should consent to return to her capital, where
her faithful subjects surrounded her with honour and respect. Two
hours later Bothwell departed at a gallop, and placed himself in
safety; but Mary was a prisoner, and she was conducted to the
house of the Provost of Edinburgh, where she remained shut up for
twenty-four hours without being approached by any one. On the
morrow, after nightfall, a numerous guard took the captive to
Lochleven Castle, under the custody of William Douglas and his
mother, formerly the mistress of James V. and the mother of
Murray. Bothwell soon left the kingdom.
{355}
The anger of Elizabeth, at the news of the arrest of Mary, was
violent and unfeigned. Not that she took much interest in the
rival whose power she had incessantly endeavoured to ruin,
through fear of the enterprises which she might attempt against
England, but the outrage suffered by the Queen of Scotland cast a
reflection upon all sovereigns. It was a blow at the regal
dignity, the fruit of the pernicious principles which Knox and
his adherents propagated. Sir Nicholas Throgmorton was sent to
the confederate noblemen to command them to deliver their queen;
but Cecil was in no such haste as his mistress to see Mary out of
prison. His private instructions relaxed the ardour of the
negotiator. The lords of the council had lost no time. Lord
Lindsay appeared at Lochleven, the bearer of an act of abdication
in favour of the little prince. The queen was invited to sign it;
she refused. Lindsay took hold of her arm, and squeezing it in
his iron gauntlet, "Sign," he said, "if you do not wish to die as
the assassin of your husband." The queen signed without looking
at the paper, merely raising her sleeve to show to those present
the traces of the violence which she had just suffered. The
uncouth warrior was himself ashamed. "I did not know that the
flesh of women was like newly-fallen snow," he muttered; but he
carried away the document. King James VI. was proclaimed and
crowned on the 20th of June, and on the 22nd of August the Earl
of Murray, who had returned to Scotland, after a prudent absence,
was declared regent of the kingdom. He paid a visit to his sister
at Lochleven, and asserted that he only accepted that office out
of consideration for the prayers and tears of Mary.
{356}
In the month of December, an act of the council declared the
queen an accomplice in the murder of her husband, and in the
abduction of her person by Bothwell. The deed was proved, it was
said, by a correspondence between Mary and Bothwell, recently
discovered by the Earl of Morton. The responsibility of the
deposition of the queen fell entirely on her own head, and was
but the just punishment of her crimes.
Justice or the violence of men might take everything from Mary
Stuart, except the power of her charms. Even at Lochleven, she
contrived to make partisans and win friends. On the 2nd of May,
1568, the lords of the council suddenly learnt that the queen had
escaped from Lochleven, through the skill of a young man who had
contrived to steal the keys. She arrived by night at Hamilton
Castle, and had already revoked her abdication. A week had not
elapsed before she had gathered an army around her.
The situation was critical, but the regent and his friends
contrived to face the danger. As Mary advanced towards Dunbarton
Castle, she encountered a body of troops, small in number, but
disciplined and well armed; her partisans sprang to the combat
with more zeal than strategy; they were soon defeated and put to
flight. The deserted queen at first escaped the pursuit of her
enemies, but she felt that she was closely pressed. The thought
of the horrors of a prison chilled her with fear; she had
expected death when she had been in the hands of her revolted
subjects; she resolved to place herself under the protection of
her good sister, Queen Elizabeth, and to proceed to England. The
friends who yet surrounded her were opposed to this project.
{357}
The Archbishop of St. Andrew's implored her upon his knees to
abandon it; but Mary would listen to nothing; she stepped into a
little fishing-boat to cross the Solway, and landed, on the 16th
of May, at Workington, a fortnight after her escape from
Lochleven, hence to direct her course at once towards Carlisle.
Arrived there, she despatched a messenger to solicit an interview
with Elizabeth. The fugitive queen was already lodged in a
fortress, rather as a prisoner than as a sovereign, when she
received the reply of Elizabeth to her request. The Queen of
England could not see her, it was said, until she should have
cleared herself of all suspicion with regard to the death of her
husband.
Elizabeth had refused to grant the title of regent to Murray, and
she had appeared to espouse the cause of Mary; but the policy of
Cecil received too opportune an assistance from the imprudent
confidence of the Queen of Scotland, to allow the opportunity to
pass without profiting by it. The captive committed the mistake
of asking that, if the queen could not protect her, she would at
least allow her to traverse her kingdom, to go and beg the
support of the foreign princes, "the King of France and the King
of Spain being bound to come to her assistance on this occasion."
The Catholic confederation in Scotland, at the threshold of
England, was too real a danger for the wisdom of Elizabeth not to
be struck with it. She consented to the proposal of Cecil, and
offered to serve as arbitrator between the Queen of Scotland and
her subjects, through the agency of an English commission. Mary
indignantly refused. She could not and would not degrade the
crown of Scotland to the condition of vassalage; she was the
queen and independent.
{358}
The judges who were suggested to her, had at all times fomented
the agitations against her, and supported her enemies. She asked
for no other favour than liberty to return to Scotland, or to
repair to France. She had come to England upon the faith of the
assurances of friendship which Queen Elizabeth had transmitted to
her while she was at Lochleven. "Being innocent, as, thank God, I
know I am, do you not (she asked) do me a wrong by keeping me
here?"
In reply to this appeal, which it was difficult to reject with
common justice, Mary was transferred from Carlisle to Bolton
Castle. The agents of Elizabeth, in all the courts of Europe,
appeared to have given the signal to each other to alarm her
concerning the consequences of the liberation of the Queen of
Scotland. "Her Grace now holds the wolf who wished to devour
her," wrote, from Paris, Sir Henry Norris; "it is said that there
is a conspiracy between the King of France, the King of Spain,
and the Pope, to ruin her Majesty, and to put the Queen of
Scotland in her place."
Elizabeth sent a messenger to Scotland, to call upon the regent
and the confederate lords to cease hostilities; but her
representations had little effect, while the manœuvres of the
Scottish insurgents powerfully impressed her. She began to
believe in the crime of which Mary so vigorously protested her
innocence, and she demanded that the Queen of Scotland should
exculpate herself in her eyes, promising to place her again upon
the throne if her innocence should be proved; for, at the bottom
of her heart, and in her royal sympathy for sovereigns, she had
been and remained shocked at the audacity of the Scots, who had
dared to dethrone their queen, whatever might have been her
faults.
{359}
The regent had replied to the reproaches and threats of the Queen
of England, that "if Elizabeth wished to wage war against them,
they would not sacrifice their lives, and would not risk their
possessions, by passing as rebels in the world, when they had in
their hands the means of justifying themselves, whatever regret
that might occasion them."
The die was cast; the accusers of Queen Mary, her brother, Lord
Murray, and his constant enemy, Lord Morton, were to come from
Scotland, to be confronted with her before the commission of
English judges. All parties were equally uncertain, respecting
the result of the conference, for all distrusted Queen Elizabeth,
who had lavished upon both sides the most contradictory promises.
Mary counted upon her to replace her again upon her throne. "I
have abandoned despatching my letters to the courts of France and
Spain, relying upon the promises of your Grace, and wishing, if I
am to be restored to the throne, that it may be solely by the
means of the court of England." However, Cecil had assured Murray
"that it was not intended to re-establish the Queen of Scotland,
if her crime is proved, whatever her friends may say."
{360}
The conferences opened at York, upon the 4th of October. There
were repeated all the arguments, there were enumerated all the
facts well known in history. Mary threw the guilt of the crime
not only upon Bothwell, but upon his accomplices, causing it to
be clearly understood that her accusers had good reasons for
making the whole weight of it fall upon her. She resolutely
denied the genuineness of the letters found in her casket, of
which copies only had been produced at first, and she demanded to
be admitted to the queen, to defend herself in her presence. The
conferences were transferred from York to Westminster. The Queen
of England and her ministers felt the necessity for following
more closely the dark intrigues which intersected each other in
all directions around the captive queen. The secretary Maitland
had opened negotiations for the marriage of the Queen of Scotland
with the Duke of Norfolk, affirming that the Protestantism of the
great English nobleman would reassure the reforming party in
Scotland, and would definitively re-establish the throne of the
Queen. It is probable that the designs of the skilful intriguer
went further. He was aware of the secret discontent of the
English Catholics, of the powerful friends whom Norfolk could
rally around him, and he hoped no doubt to raise a revolt in
England. The wisdom of Cecil saw through the manœuvre. The
liberty of Mary was for ever lost, even could her innocence have
been proven, which it assuredly was not. Mary in Scotland
constantly threatened the throne of Elizabeth. The servants of
the Queen of England were even alarmed for her life. Mary in
prison was dangerous, no doubt, but the peril was less and the
question of the justice of the detention of a sovereign who had
voluntarily come to place herself under the protection of her
relative, did not enter into the matter.
{361}
On the 11th of January, 1569, after three months of conferences
and intrigues, Elizabeth publicly declared to the Regent Murray
that nothing had been proved against his honour or that of his
partisans, but that the crimes imputed to Queen Mary had not been
demonstrated with sufficient clearness to inspire her with a bad
opinion of her good sister. Nevertheless, Murray returned freely
to Scotland, supplied with the money which was necessary for the
support of his government, and Mary remained in prison, in spite
of her protestations and anger. Elizabeth several times found
means of counselling her to abandon the crown and to lead a
peaceful life in England, but Mary firmly replied that she was
determined to die rather than to comply with such suggestions;
that justice required that she should be reestablished upon her
throne, after which "she would show as much clemency to the
authors of her troubles, as should appear to her compatible with
her honour and the good of her kingdom." The captive also
protested that she would not consent to proceed further away from
the frontier; but, on the 26th of January, in cold and gloomy
weather, the beautiful queen was compelled to mount a wretched
horse, and accompanied by a few ladies, and a small number of
servants, to ride as far as Tutbury Castle in Staffordshire, a
fortress belonging to the Earl of Shrewsbury. This nobleman was
henceforth entrusted with her custody, a constant anxiety to the
sovereign who under the influence of female jealousy had belied
the nobler side of her character, and who now could find no place
sufficiently strong, no jailor sufficiently vigilant to keep the
prisoner whom she was unjustly detaining.
{362}
The affairs of Queen Elizabeth were as much complicated abroad as
at home, and her external policy was neither frank nor sincere.
The oppression of the United Provinces by the King of Spain had
aroused a general discontent which brought about insurrections in
the towns, and the beginning of that indomitable rebellion which
was to end in the dismemberment of the Low Countries. The Prince
of Orange had placed himself at the head of the oppressed people,
protecting the religious and political liberties of his country,
and his great struggle with the terrible Duke of Alba had begun.
Everywhere the Protestants felt themselves threatened, and
conspiracies recommenced in France. The Prince of Orange and the
Prince of Condé both applied to Queen Elizabeth for assistance
and money. The queen secretly supported them in a niggardly and
unwilling fashion, though urged by Cecil, whose policy was more
firm, whose intelligence was more clear-sighted, and whose views
were broader than those of his mistress; but she took care loudly
to protest her friendship for the King of Spain and Charles IX.,
while encouraging the open or secret enemies who were struggling
against their power. Upon all stages and in all countries of
Europe the policy of the sixteenth century continually presents
that character of duplicity and falsehood which necessarily
results from the absence of publicity and control, but which
renders history difficult to understand, and more difficult to
relate.
{363}
Amidst the embarrassments which the claimants of the succession
to the crown of England caused her, Elizabeth had resumed, it,
indeed, she had ever abandoned her matrimonial negotiations. The
Archduke Charles was yet unmarried, and, in 1567, the queen
solemnly sent the Earl of Sussex, as ambassador, to Vienna, to
deal with the great question of religion. The archduke had never
come to England, although he had several times been invited, and
the queen declared that she would never marry a man without
having seen him. Sussex lavished upon her descriptions of the
person of the Archduke, not without adding to them the attraction
of his domains, and of the great position which he occupied at
the court of the Emperor. He assured the prince that this time
the queen wished to proceed seriously in the matter, since she
was free to marry whomsoever she should think fit, and she had
never inclined towards any other union. The archduke felt much
honoured, but when the question of religion was opened, he
frankly declared that his ancestors had always professed the same
religion as himself, that he knew no other, and would never
change it. Elizabeth then urged the Protestant feeling of her
subjects, without, however, breaking off the negotiations, which
only ended on the day when the archduke married the daughter of
the Duke of Bavaria.
The embarrassments of Elizabeth in England were complicated
through the progress of the intrigue having for its object the
marriage of Mary with the Duke of Norfolk. Elizabeth had openly
spoken of it to the Duke, who had excused himself, affirming that
he could never think of uniting himself to a princess who had
raised claims to the throne of England, nor to a woman whose
husband could not sleep peacefully upon his pillow.
{364}
This allusion to the fate of Darnley had for a moment lulled the
distrust of the Queen of England, but Cecil was alive to all the
dangers which threatened his mistress. He had a short time before
discovered the marriage of Lady Mary Grey, sister of Lady Jane
and Lady Catherine. "What a mischance!" he wrote; "Sergeant
Portier, the tallest and fattest of the gentlemen of the court,
has conceived the idea of secretly marrying Lady Mary Grey, the
shortest of all the ladies. They have been placed in separate
prisons, the crime being very great." And the jealousy of
Elizabeth towards any who approached the throne closely, or at a
distance, was so excessive, that the unhappy Mary remained in
prison until her death, without ever seeing her husband again.
Deplorable end of a family doomed to the most tragic reverses!
Cecil had personal reasons for watching the intrigue for the
marriage of Mary with the Duke of Norfolk. The Earl of Leicester,
always jealous of the influence of the great Minister with his
mistress, endeavoured secretly to undermine a power which he
dared not attack face to face, and he exerted himself to attach
the powerful Norfolk by urging him on in his perilous
undertaking. The duke hesitated, but the Earl of Arundel and the
Earl of Pembroke united themselves with Leicester. They
despatched to Queen Mary articles of marriage, intended to insure
the security of Elizabeth, by the total renunciation by Mary of
her pretensions to the crown of England, and by an alliance,
offensive and defensive, with the queen, her good sister. Mary
Stuart was to allow the reformed religion to be established in
Scotland, and to give her hand to the Duke of Norfolk.
{365}
People who are anxious to get out of prison are ready to accept
harsh conditions, especially when they are not firmly resolved to
observe them. Mary promised all that was desired with the sole
reservation that the consent of Elizabeth should be obtained to
the marriage. "All my misfortunes," she said, "have arisen from
the anger of my sister, when I married Darnley." Leicester was
counted upon to obtain this favour, and the duke wrote the most
passionate letters to Mary, through the agency of the Bishop of
Ross, who was still faithful to his mistress. The consent of the
Kings of Spain and France had been asked for, and Murray was to
propose to the Parliament of Scotland the liberation of the
Queen.
He proposed it, in effect, though probably without any great
sincerity. Mary had brought many misfortunes and few benefits to
Scotland, and her brother had not that attachment for her which
causes all other considerations to be forgotten. The articles
coming from England were rejected; the question of the divorce
which Bothwell had caused to be declared in Denmark was not even
examined, and Queen Elizabeth was warned of what was preparing in
the dark. She was at Farnham; the rumour of the marriage
circulated at the court. Leicester had taken no step with regard
to it as yet. Norfolk was there, not daring to go away; he dined
at the table of the queen, who one day said to him, with a
significant look, which reminded him of his own words, "Good
evening, my lord duke; be careful upon what pillow you rest your
head." Norfolk took alarm. A few days afterwards, the court was
at Titchfield.
{366}
Leicester fell ill; the queen hastened to his bedside, and there
impelled by remorse and keeping up the farce of passion,
Leicester avowed to her with tears that he had acted disloyally
towards her, by endeavouring, unknown to her, to marry her rival
to the Duke of Norfolk. Leicester obtained his pardon, but the
royal displeasure rested upon the Duke of Norfolk. The disfavour
of Elizabeth was dangerous; the Duke retired to Kenninghall,
whence he was soon recalled. A French servant of Mary Stuart,
arrested in Scotland, had, it is said, made fresh revelations
upon the complicity of his mistress in the murder of Darnley; the
servant was executed, but the imprisoned queen remained exposed
to the anger and indignation of Elizabeth. An insurrection in the
North was feared, for the Earls of Arundel and Pembroke had both
quitted the court. Norfolk was conducted to the Tower; the Bishop
of Ross was arrested, although he pleaded the privilege of an
ambassador, and all the noblemen compromised in the intrigue
received an order to retire to their homes. The anxieties of
Elizabeth, real or feigned, were not without some foundation. The
Catholics of her kingdom, groaning under a secret but cruel
oppression, naturally turned towards the Queen of Scotland, in
their eyes the legitimate heiress to the throne, sanctified by
her misfortunes, surrounded by the double fascination of her
charms and of that faith towards which she had always manifested
the most sincere attachment. The Huguenots had recently suffered
great disasters at the battle of Jarnac, where the Prince of
Condé had been killed, and also at the battle of Moncontour.
{367}
The English noblemen whom the queen had gradually allowed to pass
into the service of the French Protestants were compelled to
return to England, whither they brought gloomy tales of the
cruelty of the victorious Catholics, and of their resolve to
cause Catholicism to triumph everywhere, no matter by what means.
To complete the hostility of the Continent, Queen Elizabeth,
always greedy for money, had taken possession in time of peace of
a fleet of Spanish galleons, bearing to the Duke of Alba the sums
sent him by the King of Spain, which fleet had taken refuge upon
the coast in order to escape the Huguenot vessels. It was
pretended, at the court of England, that the money did not belong
to Philip II., but to some Genoese and Lombard bankers, who could
have no objection to lend it to Queen Elizabeth. The vessels of
the English merchant navy had all become pirates, stopping and
pillaging Spanish and French ships, seconding the attempts and
projects of the Huguenots upon all coasts, and bringing arms and
supplies to them. Some convoys setting out for La Rochelle were
even accompanied by royal vessels, and the queen secretly
authorized a great number of noblemen to take service in the army
of the Huguenots, or in that of the Prince of Orange, while she
replied to the complaints of the Spanish and French ambassadors
by the assurance of her friendship for their sovereigns and of
her wish to preserve the peace. Treachery was met by treachery. A
conspiracy, half Spanish, half French, was preparing upon the
Continent, to encourage the insurrection of the Catholics.
Ridolfi, an agent sent from Italy, had communication with the
Duke of Alba on passing through the Low Countries.
{368}
Evil designs were secretly meditated against the life of
Elizabeth, and the representations of the governor-general, who
did not believe in the possibility of success, having had no
effect upon his master, the intrigue was developed in the north
of England; the tyranny of Elizabeth had itself paved the way for
it.
Captive princes always find means of communicating with their
partisans, however close may be their prison, and however strict
the supervision may appear. Mary Stuart had entered into
relations with all the great Catholic noblemen of Yorkshire,
Durham and Northumberland. An attempt at escape had even been
organized, which was to place her at the head of her little army,
but the project collapsed, and, on the 16th of November, 1569,
the Earls of Northumberland and Westmoreland, with a great number
of noblemen and retainers, raised the standard of revolt, with
the intention of marching upon Tutbury, to deliver and proclaim
the captive queen. Upon the way the insurgents burnt in the
churches the prayer books, while announcing everywhere that the
Catholic religion was re-established, and summoning all good
Catholics to join them. But Mary had already been transferred
from Tutbury to Coventry. The populations did not respond to the
appeal of the rebels; the southern counties took up arms against
them. A goodly number of Catholics joined the royal army,
assembled at York. Uneasy and irresolute, the two earls fell back
upon Praby Castle. They besieged Sir George Bowes, in Barnard
Castle, compelled him to capitulate, and planted themselves in
the little port of Hartlepool, hoping to receive Spanish
assistance through the Low Countries.
{369}
Meanwhile the Earl of Sussex, who had delayed so long at York
that suspicions had been aroused as to his loyalty, was at length
advancing against the rebels with the reinforcements which the
Earl of Warwick had brought him. The insurgents fell back slowly
towards the frontier of Scotland, and soon took refuge, without
fighting, in that kingdom, the support of which they had hoped
for. Elizabeth at once demanded the surrender of all the chiefs.
Murray could not or would not satisfy this requirement. The Earl
of Northumberland alone was in his hands. The Earl of
Westmoreland, Egremont, Ratcliff, and the other great noblemen
were in safety at the residences of their Scottish friends, who
furnished them with means to reach the Low Countries. The regent
sent his prisoner to Lochleven, saying that he would exchange him
for Queen Mary; but before the negotiation had begun, even before
Lord Leonard Dacre, the last of the insurgents who still held out
in England, had been in his turn obliged to take refuge in
Scotland, Murray was assassinated on the 22nd of January, 1570,
in the streets of Linlithgow, and Queen Elizabeth wreaked her
vengeance upon the counties which had taken part in the
insurrection. "There are so many guilty persons to condemn,"
wrote the Bishop of Durham to Cecil, "that difficulty is
experienced in finding enough men innocent of all rebellion, to
make juries of them." A royal declaration was read in all the
churches in the peaceful districts, as well as in the regions
bristling with gibbets, reminding the people of the peaceful
years which England had enjoyed under the reign of Elizabeth, and
affirming that she claimed, as chief of the Church, no other
authority than that which her predecessors had exerted, her noble
father, King Henry VIII., and her dear brother, King Edward VI.
{370}
She did not intend to put a constraint upon the conscience of her
subjects, provided the Christian religion, as it was established
in the acts of faith, should in nowise be molested, and that
people should conform themselves to the laws of the kingdom, for
the practice of public worship. Liberty, as understood by Queen
Elizabeth, consisted in doing exactly as she commanded.
The death of Murray, the only man sufficiently skilful and
influential to maintain a little order in unhappy Scotland, had
again delivered up that kingdom to the dissensions of parties.
The Duke of Chatellerault and the Earl of Argyle immediately took
possession of the government in the name of Queen Mary; but
Morton, at the head of the _king's men_, as the partisans of
James VI. were called, had taken up arms, summoning England to
his aid. Elizabeth sent him an army and a regent. She had taken
back into favour the Earl of Lennox, father of Darnley, and
grandfather of the little king, and despatched him to Scotland,
to govern in the name of his grandson, while the English troops
entered several times into Scotland, devastating all the southern
counties, burning down the towns and villages, and supporting the
efforts of the new regent, who was implacable in ravaging the
domains of the Duke of Chatellerault and of all the family of the
Hamiltons. When Sir William Drury returned to Berwick, on the 3rd
of June, after the recent campaign, the ravages had been so
great, that the authority of Lennox appeared to be established
upon the ruin of all his adversaries.
{371}
The Catholic arms had failed as well as the Catholic
conspiracies. Pope Pius V. was anxious to try the spiritual
thunders of the Vatican. A bull declaring the excommunication of
Elizabeth, depriving her of her pretended rights to the crown of
England, and absolving her subjects from their allegiance, had
been prepared for some time; it was signed after the insurrection
had failed, and several copies of it were sent to the Duke of
Alba; but Philip II. prohibited the publication of them in the
Low Countries. On the 13th of May, 1570, however, the bull was
posted upon the door of the palace of the Bishop of London.
During the investigations which were immediately made in courts
of law, of evil notoriety both in political and religious
affairs, it was ascertained from a student under torture, that he
had received a copy of the bull from a rich Catholic gentleman
named Felton. The latter was arrested, and he avowed without
hesitation that he had posted up the bull, but no punishment
could make him reveal the names of his accomplices. Being
condemned to a traitor's death, he walked to the place of
execution as to a martyrdom, designating the queen by the name of
"Pretender," and remaining firm in his enthusiasm until the last
moment. Before his death, and while upon the scaffold, however,
he asked that the pardon of Elizabeth might be solicited for
aught in which he might have offended her, and sent her, as a
token a magnificent ring of great value, which he took from his
finger. Even among those who contended against her with the
greatest tenacity, Elizabeth contrived to win from her people so
sincere and loyal an affection, that condemned persons sent
presents to her, and criminals whom she had caused to have a hand
cut off for having written against her, seized their hats with
their left hands and waved them above their heads, exclaiming,
"God bless Queen Elizabeth!"
{372}
The faithful attachment of the English nation to its sovereign
did not, however, prevent the progress of a new principle of
liberty which grew with the independent and firm opinions of a
portion of the Protestant population. Elizabeth had preserved at
the bottom of her heart considerable affection for the Catholic
doctrines, still more for the external practices of their
worship. She loved sacerdotal garments and pompous ceremonies.
She retained in her chapel some candles and a crucifix, and she
had a horror of married priests. All the weight of her authority
did not prevent the most fervent Protestants of her kingdom,
especially among the middle classes, from being convinced that
the Reformation had been too quickly checked in England, and had
not been sufficiently thorough. They thus inclined more and more
towards the religious practices and doctrines of the Continent in
their austere simplicity. The "Puritans," as they were already
called, were in bad odour with Elizabeth, and she often
persecuted them, all the more because she attributed to them, and
not without reason, the republican and democratic tendencies
fostered in Scotland by Knox, of which she had seen the effect in
the revolts against Mary Stuart.
{373}
A certain number of Bishops and many great noblemen secretly
inclined towards the Puritan ideas. Even Cecil was not hostile to
them, although he had the royal favor more at heart than all the
sects and doctrines. In the Parliament of 1571, the Puritans
raised their heads for the first time. Thomas Cartwright, a
distinguished professor who occupied, at Cambridge, the Margaret
Professorship of Theology, maintained that the Episcopal system
was opposed to the Holy Scriptures. He was suspended, but not
without commotion among the public. The laws proposed to
Parliament were hostile to the Catholics; they prohibited, under
the penalties of treason, claiming the succession to the crown,
for whomsoever it might be, during the lifetime of the Queen;
they placed an absolute veto upon any communication with the
Pope, and all obedience rendered to his bulls; but at the same
time they required assiduity in the worship established by the
State, and, four times a year, participation in the communion of
the Anglican Church. This last article was abandoned by the
Queen, but the Anglican worship was as odious to the Puritans as
to the Catholics. They presented to Parliament seven bills for
the progress of reform and the repression of abuses. The Queen,
in a passion, ordered the member of the House who had proposed
them, Mr. Stickland, to abstain from appearing at the sittings;
but the Puritans had gained more ground than the Queen was aware
of; they introduced a motion to summon Strickland to the bar, and
to cause his exclusion to be explained to him, declaring that the
House which could decide the right to the throne, had the
privilege of occupying itself in ecclesiastical matters. The wise
prudence of Elizabeth prevailed over her anger.
{374}
Strickland reappeared on the morrow in Parliament, and was
received with acclamations by his colleagues; but the Queen had
been vanquished, and her aversion to the Puritans was thereby
increased. It was the first triumph gained by the fathers of the
liberties of England over the political and religious despotism
winch rose in the shadow of the throne of the Tudors. At the end
of the session, after the Commons had been reprimanded for their
indocility, by the Lord Keeper of the Seals, Nicholas Bacon,
Parker, archbishop of Canterbury, caused Mr. Wentworth, one of
the great orators of the House of Commons, to be summoned, to
demand of him how they had dared to suppress some of the articles
of faith which had been presented to their vote. "We were too
busy to have time to ascertain whether they were in conformity
with the word of God," boldly replied Wentworth. "What?" said the
Bishop; "you are mistaken, you must refer to us in this matter."
"No," said the Puritan, "by the faith which I have in God, we
will vote nothing without understanding what it relates to, for
that would be to make you Pope; it will not be by our hands."
Nevertheless, and notwithstanding the proud resistance of the
Houses, the Bishops continued to insist upon the preservation of
the new edition of the articles of faith, under thirty-nine
heads, which had replaced the forty articles of Edward VI. A
complete submission was required of the pastors, and they were
deprived of their livings at the first refusal declared before
the court of high commission, entrusted to judge all
ecclesiastical disputes.
{375}
"Matters will soon be ended with them," wrote Parker to Cecil,
speaking of the nonconformist ministers, "for I know that they
are cowards." The learned archbishop was never more completely
mistaken. The courage of the Puritans was to remain firm through
all persecutions. A hundred years were not destined to elapse
without bringing the day of their triumph. The friends of Queen
Mary had resolved upon her marriage. The Duke of Norfolk was in
the Tower. People began to talk of causing the Queen of Scotland
to marry her brother-in-law, the Duke of Anjou. Queen Elizabeth
was alarmed, and in order to cut short this new intrigue, she
made overtures on her own behalf to the Court of France. Her most
skilful diplomatist, Walsingham, was sent to Paris, entrusted
with this negotiation, complicated by the secret support which
the queen continued to give to the Huguenots. The parley lasted
for several months, but the Duke of Anjou positively refused to
change his religion; people turned their eyes towards the Duke of
Alençon, the youngest son of Catherine of Médicis; he had
scarcely reached his eighteenth year; the queen was drawing near
her fortieth. The negotiations nevertheless took their course,
amusing Elizabeth by outward tokens of gallantry, in which she
still took delight, and, at the same time, preventing all the
assistance which the court of France might have brought to avert
the unhappy fate of Mary Stuart. Charles IX. had claimed, for his
sister-in-law, permission to live in France; but, piqued at the
reports of the French ambassadors, upon the relations of the
captive with the King of Spain, and by her correspondence with
the Duke of Alba, he at length exclaimed, "Ah! the poor fool will
never cease till she shall have lost her head; she will be put to
death through her own fault, I see it clearly; but I am powerless
in the matter."
{376}
The prospect of the throne of England for the Duke of Alençon was
too brilliant to be sacrificed to the interests of Mary. Queen
Catherine was negotiating an alliance, offensive and defensive,
with Walsingham.