diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/64437-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/64437-0.txt | 10428 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 10428 deletions
diff --git a/old/64437-0.txt b/old/64437-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 9a0873f..0000000 --- a/old/64437-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,10428 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook, Leaders of the People, by Joseph Clayton - - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - - - - -Title: Leaders of the People - Studies in Democratic History - - -Author: Joseph Clayton - - - -Release Date: February 1, 2021 [eBook #64437] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - - -***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LEADERS OF THE PEOPLE*** - - -E-text prepared by deaurider, Charlie Howard, and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team (http://www.pgdp.net) from page images generously made -available by Internet Archive (https://archive.org) - - - -Note: Project Gutenberg also has an HTML version of this - file which includes the original illustrations. - See 64437-h.htm or 64437-h.zip: - (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/64437/64437-h/64437-h.htm) - or - (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/64437/64437-h.zip) - - - Images of the original pages are available through - Internet Archive. See - https://archive.org/details/leadersofpeoples00clayiala - - - - - -[Illustration: _John Hampden._ - -_From a print by J. Houbraken 1740._] - - -LEADERS OF THE PEOPLE - -Studies in Democratic History - -by - -JOSEPH CLAYTON ❦ ❦ - -With a Frontispiece in Photogravure -and Numerous Other Illustrations - - - - - - -New York: Mitchell Kennerley -Two East Twenty-Ninth Street · MCMXI - - - - - To the Memory of - - FREDERICK YORK POWELL - - Regius Professor of Modern History - at the University of Oxford - 1894–1904 - - “I loved him in life and I love him - none the less in death: for what - I loved in him is not dead.” - - - - -CONTENTS - - - _Page_ - PREFACE xi - - I. ARCHBISHOP ANSELM AND NORMAN AUTOCRACY, 1093–1130 3 - - II. THOMAS OF CANTERBURY, THE DEFENDER OF THE POOR, 1162–1170 33 - - III. WILLIAM FITZOSBERT, THE FIRST ENGLISH AGITATOR, 1188–1189 69 - - IV. STEPHEN LANGTON AND THE GREAT CHARTER, 1207–1215 81 - - V. BISHOP GROSSETESTE, THE REFORMER, 1235–1253 99 - - VI. SIMON OF MONTFORT AND THE ENGLISH PARLIAMENT, 1258–1265 117 - - VII. WAT TYLER AND THE PEASANT REVOLT, 1381 141 - - VIII. JACK CADE, THE CAPTAIN OF KENT, 1450 173 - - IX. SIR THOMAS MORE AND FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE, 1529–1535 193 - - X. ROBERT KET AND THE NORFOLK RISING, 1549 217 - - XI. ELIOT, HAMPDEN, AND PYM AND THE SUPREMACY OF THE COMMONS, - 1626–1643 245 - - XII. JOHN LILBURNE AND THE LEVELLERS, 1647–1653 277 - - XIII. WINSTANLEY THE DIGGER, 1649–1650 293 - - XIV. MAJOR CARTWRIGHT, THE FATHER OF REFORM, 1776–1820 307 - - XV. ERNEST JONES AND CHARTISM, 1838–1868 319 - - CONCLUSION 335 - - INDEX 339 - - - - -LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS - - - JOHN HAMPDEN - _From the Engraving by Jacob Houbraken_ _Frontispiece_ - - facing p. - ARCHBISHOP ANSELM - _From an Old French Engraving in the British Museum_ 3 - - THOMAS À BECKET - _From an Engraving after Van Eyck_ 33 - - KING RICHARD II. - _From the Panel Painting in the Sanctuary in Westminster Abbey_ 141 - - SIR THOMAS MORE - _From the Drawing by Hans Holbein_ 193 - - SIR JOHN ELIOT - _From a Steel Engraving by William Holl_ 245 - - JOHN PYM - _From the Engraving by Jacob Houbraken_ 257 - - MAJOR CARTWRIGHT - _From a Contemporary Drawing_ 307 - - - - -PREFACE - - “_Let us now praise famous men, and our fathers who begat us._” - - -The names of the seventeen men, here named “Leaders of the People,” are -for the most part familiar in our mouths as household words. Those who -triumphed, like Anselm and Stephen Langton; or whose cause triumphed, -like Simon of Montfort, Eliot, Pym and Hampden, are beyond any loss of -fame. Those who in high place quitted themselves like men and died game -(if the phrase may be permitted), as did Thomas Becket and Sir Thomas -More, have, for all time, deservedly their reward. The unsuccessful -rebels, FitzOsbert (called Longbeard), Wat Tyler, Jack Cade and Robert -Ket, are hard put to get rid of the obloquy heaped upon them by -contemporary authority; while the later rebels, equally unsuccessful, -Lilburne, Winstanley, Major Cartwright and Ernest Jones, relying on -the pen rather than the sword, escaped the hangman, and in so doing -narrowly escaped oblivion. Good Bishop Grosseteste, living out his long -life, thwarted often, but unmartyred, enjoys the reputation commonly -awarded to conscientious public servants who die in harness. - -On the whole, re-perusing the records of these seventeen men, who would -altogether reverse the verdicts of time? The obloquy may be removed -when the work of the rebels is fairly seen, and it may be judged that -they deserved better of the State than appeared when they troubled its -peace. The rebels of the pen, too, should be worthy of recollection -in this age, for they wrought manfully with the weapon now at once so -powerful and so popular. The greater men of our series stand out higher -as the distance increases. So far readjusted, the awards of history may -be accepted. - -But with all the differences of character, one common quality binds -these men whose stories are here retold--a resolute hatred of -oppression. And one common work, successful or unsuccessful, was -theirs--to labour for the liberties of England and the health of its -people. The value of each man’s work can only be stated approximately: -it is difficult to make full allowance for the vastly different parts -our heroes, statesmen and rebels alike, were called to play. The great -thing is, that whatever the part, they played it faithfully, as they -read it, to the end. We may admit the degrees of service given: it is -impossible to do otherwise. Some of these Leaders shone as great orbs -of light in their day and generation, lighting not only England, but -all western Europe--and still their light burns true and clear across -the centuries. Others were but flickering rush-lights--long extinct -now. But none were will-o’-the-wisps, for all helped to show the road -to be travelled by English men and women seeking freedom, and moving -ever towards democracy. At the least, we--enjoying an inheritance won -at a great price, and only to be retained on terms no easier--can -keep the memory green of some few valiant servants of our liberties. -What is wanted is a real history of the growth of the idea of freedom -and of popular liberty in this country; and these rough biographical -sketches may be accepted as a contribution to the materials for such a -book. “Biography is a department of history, and stands to it as the -life-history of a plant or an animal does to general biology.” - -I have gone back to all the original sources to get once more at the -lives of these “Leaders of the People,” and to see them as they were -seen by their contemporaries; but I have also done my best to read -what the historians of our own day have written concerning them, and -in mentioning my authorities I have, in each case, given a list of the -modern books that seem to me valuable. - - J. C. - -_September, 1910._ - - - - -Archbishop Anselm and Norman Autocracy - -1093–1109 - - -AUTHORITIES: Eadmer--_Historia Novorum_ and _Life of Anselm_; Orderic -of St. Evroul; _The English Chronicle_; Florence of Worcester; William -of Malmesbury; (Rolls Series); Sir Francis Palgrave--_England and -Normandy_; Freeman--_Norman Conquest_, Vol. V., _Reign of William -Rufus_; Dean Church--_St. Anselm_. - -[Illustration: ARCHBISHOP ANSELM - -(_From an old French Engraving in the British Museum._)] - - - - -ARCHBISHOP ANSELM AND NORMAN AUTOCRACY - -1093–1109. - - -The first real check to the absolutism of Norman rule in England was -given by Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury. - -The turbulent ambition of Norman barons threatened the sovereignity of -William the Conqueror and of his son, the Red King, often enough, but -these outbreaks promised no liberty for England. The fires of English -revolt were stamped out utterly five years after Senlac, and the great -Conqueror at his death left England crushed; but he left it under the -discipline of religion, and he left it loyal to the authority of the -crown, grateful for the one protection against the lawless rule of the -barons. - -The English Chronicler, writing as “one who knew him and once lived at -his court,” summed up the character of the Conqueror’s life and work in -words that have been freely quoted through the centuries:-- - -“King William was wiser and mightier than any of his forerunners. He -built many minsters, and was gentle to God’s servants, though stern -beyond all measure to those who withstood his will.... So stark and -fierce was he that none dared resist his will. Earls that did aught -against his bidding he put in bonds, and bishops he set off their -bishoprics, and abbots off their abbacies, and thanes he cast into -prison. He spared not his own brother, called Odo, who was the chief -man next to the king, but set him in prison. So just was he that the -good peace he made in this land cannot be forgotten. For he made it so -that a man might fare alone over his realm with his bosom full of gold, -unhurt; and no man durst slay another man whatsoever the evil he hath -done him; and if any man harmed a woman he was punished accordingly. He -ruled over England, and surveyed the land with such skill that there -was not one hide but that he knew who held it, and what it was worth, -and these things he set in a written book. So mighty was he that he -held Normandy and Brittany, won England and Maine, brought Scotland and -Wales to bow to him, and would, had he lived two years longer, have -won Ireland by his renown, without need of weapons. Yet surely in his -time men had much travail and very many sorrows; and poor men he made -to toil hard for the castles he had built. He fell on covetousness, and -the love of gold; and took by right and by unright many marks of gold -and more hundred pounds of silver of his people, and for little need. -He made great deer-parks, and ordered that whoso slew hart or hind, him -men should blind; and forbade men to slay deer or boar, and made the -hare go free; he loved the big game as if he were their father. And the -poor men that were oppressed he recked nought of. All must follow the -king’s will if they would live, or have land, or even a quiet life.” - -But now, in September, 1087, the great King William was dead, with -his life-work done; and from the tyranny of a strong and just ruler, -England passed to the despotism of his fearless son, William the Red, -who was “terrible and mighty over his land and his men and towards all -his neighbours;” in whose reign “all that was loathsome in the eyes of -God and righteous men was of common use; wherefore he was loathed by -well-nigh all his people, and hateful to God as his end showed.” - -There was much of the later Puritan in William I. in the steadfastness -of purpose, the suppression of “malignants,” and determination to have -justice done, no less than in the sincerity for Church reform, and -the deep respect for the ordinances of religion. No king of England -worked more harmoniously with a strong archbishop than William I. with -Lanfranc--save, perhaps, Charles I. with Laud. - -Then on the death of William I., followed less than two years later -by Lanfranc’s, came the reaction in Church and State from the efforts -after law, religion, and social decency under the Conqueror’s rule. - -The Red King had all his father’s sternness and strength, but was -without any of that belief in justice, that faith in the Sovereign -Power of a Living God, that desire for law and order, and that grave -austerity in morals, which saved the Conqueror from baseness in his -tyranny. - -William II., unmarried, made the wildest and most brutish profligacy -fashionable at court. To pay for his debaucheries and extravagances -he plundered all who could pay, in especial the Church, enjoying the -revenues of all vacant sees and abbeys, and declining to fill up the -vacancies so that this enjoyment might remain. After Lanfranc, as the -king’s chief adviser, came Ranulf (nicknamed the Torch, or Firebrand), -a coarse, unscrupulous bully, with the wit of a criminal lawyer. This -man was made Bishop of Durham, and Justiciar. For him government -meant nothing but the art of getting money for his royal master, and -silencing all opposition. - -For over three years there was no Archbishop of Canterbury, and the -Red King refused to fill up the vacancy caused by Lanfranc’s death, -preferring to enjoy the revenues and possessions of the see; a thing -that was shocking to all lovers of religion, and scandalous to those -who cared for public decency and the good estate of the country. - -Eadmer, a contemporary, describes the condition of England in those -early years of William II.:-- - -“The king seized the church at Canterbury, the mother of all England, -Scotland, and Ireland, and the neighbouring isles; he bade his officers -to make an inventory of all that belonged to it, within and without; -and after he had fixed an allowance for the support of the monks who -served God in that place, he ordered the remainder to be disposed of -at a rent and brought under his domain. So he put up the Church of -Christ to sale; giving the power of lordship over it to anyone who, -however hurtful he might be, would bid the highest price. Every year, -in wretched succession, a new rent was set; for the king would allow no -bargain to remain settled, and whoever promised more ousted him who was -paying less, unless the former tenant, giving up his original bargain, -came up of his own accord to the offer of the later bidder: and every -day might be seen, besides, the most abandoned of men on their business -of collecting money for the king, marching about the cloisters of the -monastery, heedless of the religious rule of God’s servants, and with -fierce and savage looks giving their orders on all sides; uttering -threats, lording it over every one, and showing their power to the -utmost. What scandals and quarrels and irregularities arose from this -I hate to remember. Some of the monks of the church were dispersed at -the coming of this misfortune, and sent to other houses, and those who -remained suffered many tribulations and indignities. What shall I say -of the church tenants, ground down by such wasting and misery, that one -might doubt, but that worse followed, whether escaping with bare life -they could have been more cruelly oppressed. Nor did all this happen -only at Canterbury. The same savage cruelty raged in all her daughter -churches in England, which, when bishop or abbot died, at that time -fell into widowhood. And this king, too, was the first who ordered this -woeful oppression against the churches of God; he had inherited nothing -of this sort from his father, but was alone in keeping the vacant -churches in his own hands. And thus, wherever you looked, there was -wretchedness before your eyes; and this distress lasted for nearly five -years over the Church of Canterbury, always increasing, always, as time -went on, growing more cruel and evil.” - -There is no word of exaggeration in this pitiful lament of Eadmer’s. -England under William II. was at the mercy of a Norman whose notion -of absolute monarchy was to bleed the land as a subject province. -Courageous in battle he was, and skilful in arms, but utterly heedless -of the welfare of the people he ruled. It was enough for the Red King -if his demands for money were met. There was no one strong enough to -gainsay his will, or stand before him as the prophets of old stood -before the kings of Israel, until Anselm came to Canterbury. It is only -in the utterances of men like Eadmer we learn something of the misery -of the nation.[1] - -The king was with his court at Gloucester at Christmas, 1092, and -Anselm, then abbot of the famous monastery of Bec in Normandy, was -in England at that time; partly to comfort his friend, Earl Hugh of -Chester, who was sick, and partly to attend to the English affairs of -his monastery. - -Anselm was known as the friend of Lanfranc. He had been a welcome guest -at the court of the Conqueror and in the cloisters at Canterbury. His -character stood high above all contemporaries in England or Normandy. -Anselm was surely the right man to be made archbishop, and so put -an end to a state of things which even to the turbulent barons was -discreditable to the country. - -The Red King bade Anselm come to his court, and received him with great -display of honour. Then came a private interview, and Anselm at once -told the king how men spoke ill of his misrule: “Openly or secretly -things were daily said of him by nearly all the men of his realm which -were not seemly for the king’s dignity.” They parted, and Anselm was -busy for some time in England. When the abbot wished to return to Bec -William refused him leave to quit the country. - -At the beginning of Lent, March, 1093, the king was lying sick at -Gloucester. It was believed the sickness was mortal. Certainly the king -thought himself dying. Anselm was summoned to minister to him, and on -his arrival bade the king “make a clean confession of all that he knows -that he has done against God, and promise that, should he recover, he -will without pretence amend in all things. The king at once agreed to -this, and with sorrow of heart engaged to do all that Anselm required, -and to keep justice and mercy all his life long. To this he pledged his -faith, and made his bishops witnesses between himself and God, sending -persons in his stead to promise his word to God on the altar. An Edict -was written and sealed with the king’s seal that all prisoners should -be set free in all his dominions, all debts forgiven, all offences -heretofore committed pardoned and forgotten for ever. Further, good and -holy laws were promised to the whole people, and the sacred upholding -of right and such solemn inquest into wrongdoing as may deter others.” - -Thus Eadmer. - -Florence of Worcester puts the matter more briefly. “When the king -thought himself about to die he vowed to God, as his barons advised -him, to amend his life, to sell no more churches nor farm them out, -but to defend them by his kingly might, and to end all bad laws and to -establish just laws.” - -There was still the vacant archbishopric to be filled, and the king -named Anselm for Canterbury. - -In vain Anselm pleaded that he was an old man--he was then sixty--and -unfit for so great a responsibility, that he was a monk and had shunned -the business of the world. - -The bishops assembled round the sick king’s bed would not hear the -refusal. Here was religion well nigh destroyed in England, and evil -rampant, and the Church of God stricken almost to death, and at such a -time was Anselm to prefer his own ease and quiet to the call to deliver -Canterbury from its bondage? By main force they placed a pastoral staff -within his hands, and while the crowd shouted “Long live the bishop!” -he was “carried rather than led to a neighbouring church.” The king -at once ordered that Anselm should be invested with all the temporal -rights of the see, as Lanfranc had held them, and in September, 1093, -Anselm was enthroned at Canterbury, and in December he was consecrated. - -Anselm warned the bishops and nobles when they forced the archbishopric -upon him that they were making a mistake. “You have yoked to the plough -a poor weak sheep with a wild bull,” he said. “This plough is the -Church of God, and in England it has been drawn by two strong oxen, the -king and the Archbishop of Canterbury, one to do justice and to hold -power in the things of this world, the other to teach and govern in the -things eternal. Now Lanfranc is dead, and with his untamed companion -you have joined an old and feeble sheep.” - -That the king and the archbishop were unevenly yoked was manifest on -William’s recovery, but it was no poor sheep with whom Rufus had to -deal, but a man as brave and steadfast as he was gentle and wise. - -Trouble began at once when William rose from his sick-bed. Anselm was -now enthroned and no attempt was made to revoke the appointment. But -the king’s promises of public amendment were broken without hesitation. -The pardoned prisoners were seized, the cancelled debts redemanded and -the proceedings against offenders revived. - -“Then was there so great misery and suffering through the whole realm -that no one can remember to have seen its like in England. All the evil -which the king had wrought before he was sick seemed good by the side -of the wrong which he did when he was returned to health.” - -The king wanting money for his expedition against his brother, Robert -of Normandy, tried to persuade Anselm to allow the Church lands, -bestowed since Lanfranc’s death on vassals of the crown on tenure of -military service, to remain with their holders. He was answered by -steady refusal. Had Anselm yielded, he would have been a party to the -alienation of lands, that, as part of the property of the see, he was -bound to administer for the common good; he would have been a party not -only to the spoiling of the Church, but to the robbery of the poor and -needy, whose claims, in those days, to temporal assistance from Church -estates were not disputed. Any subsequent restitution of such lands -was impossible, he foresaw, if it was shown that the archbishop had -confirmed what the king had done. - -Then came the question of a present of money to the king. Anselm -brought five hundred marks, and, but for his counsellors and men of -arms, who told him the archbishop ought to have given twice as much, -William would have taken the gift gladly enough. As it was, to show -his dissatisfaction, the money was returned. Anselm went boldly to the -king and warned him that money freely given was better than a forced -tribute. To this frank rebuke of the extortion practised by the king’s -servants, William answered that he wanted neither his money, nor his -preaching, nor his company. Anselm retired not altogether displeased at -the refusal, for too many of the clergy bought church offices by these -free gifts after they were instituted. In vain his friends urged him to -seek the king’s favour by increasing his present, Anselm gave the five -hundred marks to the poor, and shook his head at the idea of buying the -king’s favour. - -But if Anselm declined to walk in the path of corruption to oblige the -king, William was equally resolute to make the path of righteousness a -hard road for the archbishop. - -In February, 1094, when the Red King was at Hastings waiting to cross -to Normandy, Anselm appealed to him to sanction a council of bishops, -whose decisions approved by the crown should have the authority of law. -There were two things for such a council to do: (1) stop the open vice -and profligacy which ravaged the land; (2) find abbots for the many -monasteries then without heads. In Anselm’s words, the council was “to -restore the Christian religion which was well-nigh dead in so many.” - -William treated the request with angry contempt, and when Anselm sent -bishops to him asking why the king refused him friendship, an evasive -answer was returned. - -“Give him money,” said the bishops again to Anselm, “if you want peace -with him. Give him the five hundred marks, and promise him as much -more, and you will have the royal friendship. This, it seems to us, is -the only way out of the difficulty.” - -But it was not Anselm’s way. He would not even offer what had been -rejected. “Besides, the greater part of it was spent on the poor.” - -William burst out into wrathful speech when he was told of this reply. -“Never will I hold him as my father and archbishop, and ever shall I -hate him with bitter hatred. I hated him much yesterday, and to-day I -hate him still more.” - -A year later (March, 1095) at a great council of bishops and nobles, -held at the castle of Rockingham, the king’s hatred had full vent. -From the first the Archbishop of Canterbury received from the Pope a -_pallium_, the white woollen stole with four crosses, which was “the -badge of his office and dignity,”[2] and Anselm was anxious to journey -to Rome to obtain his pallium from Pope Urban. William objected to this -on the ground that there was another claimant to the papacy, and that -until he had decided who was the rightful pope no one in England had a -right to do so. In vain Anselm pointed out that he, with all Normandy, -had acknowledged Urban before he had become archbishop. William -retorted angrily that Anselm could only keep his faith to the Apostolic -See by breaking his faith to the king. - -The council of Rockingham met to settle the question--not the question -of the supremacy of Rome in Western Christendom[3]--but the question -whether, in England, there was any higher authority than the crown. -William did not pretend to dispute the papal supremacy in the Church. -His claim was that the king alone must first acknowledge the pope -before any of his subjects could do so. In reality the king’s one -desire was “to take from Anselm all authority for maintaining the -Christian religion. For as long as any one in all the land was said -to hold any power except through him, even in the things of God, it -seemed to him that the royal dignity was diminished.” (Eadmer.) William -acknowledged Pope Urban readily enough, but he would have Archbishop -Anselm understand that the papacy must be acknowledged by permission -of the king of England. That was the real ground of contention between -these two men: was there any power on earth higher in England than the -English crown? According to William, to appeal to Rome was to dispute -the absolutism of the crown. Anselm maintained that in all things of -God he must render obedience to the Chief Shepherd and Prince of the -Church, to the Vicar of St. Peter; and in matters of earthly dignity -he must render counsel and service to his lord the king. - -The bishops at Rockingham were the king’s men. Many of them had bought -their bishoprics, all were afraid of the royal displeasure. The stand -made by Anselm, unsupported though he was, did something to inspire -a better courage in the ranks of the clergy[4]; but in that Lent of -1095 there was no sign of support for the archbishop. William only -wanted to break the will of this resolute old man, the one man in all -the kingdom who dared to have a mind and utterance of his own, and the -mitred creatures of the king supported their lord even to the point -of recommending the forcible deposition of Anselm from his see, or -at least of depriving him of the staff and ring of office. With one -consent the bishops accepted the king’s suggestion of renouncing all -obedience to Anselm. - -But the barons were not so craven. To the king’s threat, “No man shall -be mine, who will be his” (Anselm’s), the nobles said bluntly that not -having taken any oath of fealty to the archbishop they could not abjure -it. And Anselm was their archbishop. “It is his work to govern the -Christian religion in this land, and we who are Christians cannot deny -his guidance while we live here.” - -The three days’ conference at Rockingham ended in disappointment to the -hopes of William of absolute autocracy, and in general contempt for the -prelates whose abject servility had availed nothing. - -Anselm alone stood higher in the eyes of the men of England, and -greater was the ill-will of William. For another two years Anselm held -his ground against the king. The pallium was brought from Rome by -Walter, Bishop of Albano, and placed on the altar at Canterbury, and -Anselm was content to take it from the altar. William had written in -vain to Pope Urban praying for the deposition of Anselm, and promising -a large annual tribute to Rome if his prayer was granted. The pope, of -course, declined to do anything of the sort, and William had to make -the best of the situation. He wanted money for his own purposes, and -his barons were now against him in his quarrel with the archbishop. -For a time William adopted a semblance of peace with Anselm, but his -anger soon blazed out again. The ground of complaint this time was that -the soldiers whom the archbishop had sent to the king for his military -expedition against Wales were inadequate--without proper equipment, and -unfit for service. The archbishop was summoned to appear before the -King’s Court to “do the king right.” - -From the time of his acceptance of the archbishopric, Anselm had been -hoping against hope that the king would support him, as the Conqueror -had supported Lanfranc, in the building up of the Christian religion -in England--this summons to the King’s Court was the death-blow to all -these hopes. The defendant in the King’s Court was at the mercy of -the king, who could pronounce whatever judgment he pleased.[5] Anselm -returned no answer to the summons, but his mind was made up. - -“Having knowledge that the king’s word ruled all judgment in the King’s -Court, where nothing was listened to except what the king willed, it -seemed to Anselm unbecoming that he should contend, as if disputing, as -litigants do, about a matter of words, and should submit the justice -of his cause to the judgment of a court where neither law, nor equity, -nor reason prevailed. So he held his peace, and gave no answer to the -messenger.” (Eadmer.) - -From the despotism of the Red King Anselm would turn for justice to the -centre of Christendom. In England he was impotent to stem the evil that -flowed from the savage absolutism of the throne. All that one man could -do to resist the royal tyranny Anselm had done, and now this summons to -the King’s Court was the final answer to all his efforts to restrain -a lawless king, and to promote the Christian religion in England. He -would not go through the farce of pleading in the King’s Court, where -judgment was settled by the unbridled caprice of the king, self-respect -forbade the archbishop from that; he would appeal to the only court on -earth higher than the courts of kings--the court whose head, in those -days, was the head of Christendom.[6] - -William dropped the summons to the King’s Court, and for a time refused -permission to Anselm to leave the country. Bishops and barons now urged -Anselm not to persist in his appeal to Rome. But the archbishop was -resolute, and in the autumn of 1097 the king yielded, and Anselm left -the country.[7] - -The first campaign against despotism in England was over--the battle -was to be renewed when Henry I. wore the crown. - -At Rome Pope Urban, with all the goodwill in the world, and with a -very real affection and regard for Anselm, could do nothing against -the Red King except rebuke his envoys, and do honour to the much-tried -archbishop. Anselm himself prevented the excommunication of William -when it was proposed at the Council of Bari, October, 1098. - -But Pope Urban would not allow Anselm to resign his archbishopric, and -this in spite of all Anselm’s entreaties. - -In the spring of 1099 came a General Council at Rome--at which Anselm -assisted--a council remarkable for its decision against allowing clergy -to receive investiture of churches from the hands of laymen, and by -so doing to become the vassals of temporal lords. Excommunication -was declared to be the penalty for all who gave or received Church -appointments on such conditions. - -It was at the close of this council that an outspoken Bishop of Lucca -called attention to Anselm’s case. “One sits amongst us in silence and -meekness who has come from the far ends of the earth. His very silence -cries aloud. His humility and patience, so gentle and so deep, as they -rise to God should set us on fire. This one man has come here, wronged -and afflicted, seeking judgment and justice of the Apostolic See. And -now this is the second year, and what help has he found?” - -Pope Urban answered that attention should be given, but nothing further -was done. - -Anselm left Rome and went to Lyons, remaining in France until the -death of William in August, 1100. Henry was at once chosen king in his -room, and crowned at Westminster three days after his brother’s death. -Six weeks later, at Henry’s earnest request--he prayed him “to come -back like a father to his son Henry and the English people”--Anselm -landed at Dover and returned to take up the task allotted to him on his -consecration as archbishop. - -Henry at the outset of his reign promised “God and all the people” that -the old scandals of selling and farming out the Church lands should -be stopped, and “to put down all unrighteousness that had been in his -brother’s time, and to hold the best laws that ever stood in any king’s -day before him.” That this charter was of value may be taken from the -verdict on the king by the Chronicler of the time. “Good man he was and -great awe there was of him. No man durst misdo against another in his -day. He made peace for man and beast. Whoso carried a burden of gold -and silver no man durst do him wrong.” - -Two evils that pressed very hardly on the mass of hard-working people, -the devastation that attended the king’s progress through the land[8], -and the coining of false money, were at Anselm’s instigation checked by -the king. - -But with all Henry’s desire for the restoration of religion and law -in the land, he was the Conqueror’s son, and for Anselm the struggle -against absolutism in government was not yet over. Only now the battle -was not with a fierce, untamed despot like the Red King, but with an -autocrat of an even more formidable type, a stern man of business, in -whose person alone must be found the source of all law and order, and -who would brook no questioning of the royal will. - -At the beginning of his reign Henry found the archbishop’s loyalty and -good sense invaluable. As Lanfranc had stood by the Conqueror in a -marriage which was objectionable from the point of view of Church law, -so Anselm stood by his son when he sought the hand of Edith, daughter -of the sainted Queen Margaret of Scotland. Here the objection to the -marriage was not on the grounds of affinity or consanguinity, but in -the fact that Edith was an inmate of the convent at Romsey, and, it -was alleged, a professed nun. Edith insisted that she had but taken -refuge in the convent to obtain the protection of her aunt Christina, -the abbess, and she had worn the habit of a nun as a safeguard against -the brutal passions of the Red King and his courtiers. The fear of -violence at the hands of the Normans had driven women to take the veil, -and Lanfranc had been known to grant release from vows taken under such -mortal pressure. Anselm was not the man to exalt the letter of the law -above the spirit of liberty. He was content that a council of the great -men in Church and State should hold an inquiry, and on their verdict -declaring Edith free of her vows, the archbishop gave his blessing on -the marriage. - -The same great qualities of loyalty and good sense made Anselm stand -by the king when the Norman lords, pricked on by Ranulf the Torch, the -rascally Bishop of Durham (who had escaped from imprisonment in the -Tower by making his gaolers drunk), and hating Henry for “his English -ways,” proposed to back up Robert of Normandy in his attempts to seize -the crown. According to Eadmer, but for Anselm’s faithfulness and -labours, which turned the scale when so many were wavering, King Henry -would have lost the sovereignty of the realm of England at that time. - -But Anselm’s services to the king are of small account by the side of -his services to English liberty, and Anselm’s resistance to Henry’s -demands for an absolute monarchy was of lasting influence in the -centuries that followed.[9] - -The struggle began when Henry called upon Anselm for a new declaration -of homage to the crown, and required him to receive the archbishopric -afresh by a new act of investiture. This was a claim that had never -been made before. “It imported that on the death of the sovereign the -archbishop’s commission expired, that his office was subordinate and -derivative, and the dignity therefore reverted to the crown.” (Sir F. -Palgrave.) - -Anselm met the demand with the answer that such a course was -impossible. Nay, the very ecclesiastical “customs” which for some time -past had given the appointment of bishops and abbots to the crown, and -had made the bishops “the king’s men” by obliging them to do homage and -to receive investiture of their office with ring and staff at the royal -hands, were now impossible for Anselm. The Council at the Lateran, at -which Anselm had been present, had forbidden the bishops of the Church -to become the vassals of the kings of the earth, and Anselm was not the -man to question this decision. He had seen only too much, under William -the Red, of the curse of royal supremacy in the Church. He had stood -up alone against the iniquities of misrule, just because the bishops, -who should have been pastors and overseers of a Christian people, were -the sworn creatures of the king. Henceforth it was forbidden by the -authority that rested in the seat of St. Peter at Rome for a bishop to -receive consecration as a king’s vassal. - -But if Anselm would be no party to what had become an intolerable evil, -Henry would not give up the rights his father had exercised without -a contest. He was willing to do his best for the Church, but it must -be in his own way. “Pledging himself in his own heart and mind not to -abate a jot of his supremacy over the clergy, he would exercise his -authority in Church affairs somewhat more decently than his father, -and a great deal more than his brother; but that was all.” (Sir F. -Palgrave.) - -Both Henry and Anselm recognized the gravity of the issue. Were the -bishops and abbots to continue to receive investiture from the king -they were “his men,” and his autocracy was established over all. Stop -the investiture and the bishops were first and chiefly the servants of -the Most High, acknowledging a sovereignty higher than that exercised -by the princes of this world, and preferring loyalty to the Church -Catholic and its Father at Rome, to blind obedience to the crown. - -In brief, the question in dispute really was--Was there, or was there -not, any power on earth greater than the English crown?--a question -which no English king before Henry VIII. answered successfully in the -negative. In contending for the freedom of the bishops of the Church -from vassalage to the crown, Anselm was contending for the existence -of an authority to which even kings should pay allegiance. It was -not the rights of the clergy that were at stake, for the terrors of -excommunication did not prevent bishops from receiving consecration -on Henry’s terms, and Anselm stood alone now, as in the days of the -Red King, in the resistance to despotism. It was the feeling and the -knowledge, which Anselm shared with the best churchmen of his day, that -great as the power of the king must be, it was a bad thing for such -power to exist unchecked, and that it were well for the world that its -mightiest monarchs should know there was a spiritual dominion given to -the successor of St. Peter, and to his children, a dominion of divine -foundation that claimed obedience even from kings. - -Anselm put it to the king that the canons of the Church, and the -decrees of a great council had forbidden the “customs” of investiture -which the king claimed; and he pleaded that he was an old man, and that -unless he could work with the king on the acceptance of the Church -canons, it was no use his remaining in England, “for he could not -hold communion with those who broke these laws”: Henry, for his part, -was much disturbed. It was a grave matter to lose the investiture of -churches, and the homage of prelates; it was a grave matter, too, to -let Anselm leave the country while he himself was hardly established -in the kingdom. “On the one side it seemed to him that he should be -losing, as it were, half of his kingdom; on the other, he feared lest -Anselm should make his brother Robert King of England,”--for Robert -might easily be brought to submit to the Apostolic See if he could be -made king on such terms. - -Henry suggested an appeal to the pope on the question of the right -of the crown to “invest” the bishops, and Anselm, who all along was -anxious for peace--if peace could be obtained without acknowledgment -of royal absolutism--at once agreed. - -The pope, of course, could not grant Henry’s request. To allow the high -offices of the Church to be disposed of at the caprice of kings and -princes, without any recognition of the sacredness of these offices, -to admit that the chief ministers of religion were first and foremost -“the king’s men,” seemed to Pope Paschal, as it seemed to Anselm, -a concession to evil, and the establishment of a principle which -experience had proved thoroughly vicious and mischievous. - -Then for nearly three years a correspondence dragged on between -Henry and the pope, neither wishing for an open rupture, and in the -meantime, Henry, backed by most of the bishops and nobles in setting at -nought the canons which had forbidden investiture, proposed to go on -appointing and investing new bishops as before. - -Finally, the king appealed to Anselm to go to Rome “and try what he -could do with the pope, lest the king by losing the rights of his -predecessors should be disgraced.” - -Anselm was now (1103) an old man of seventy, but he agreed to go; only -“he could do nothing to the prejudice of the liberty of the Church or -his own honour.” What Henry hoped for was that the pope would grant -some personal dispensation in the matter of the royal “customs,” and -he had tried to persuade Anselm that such dispensation was sure to be -granted. Anselm did not believe the dispensation possible or desirable, -but left the decision with the acknowledged head of Christendom at -Rome; and though for another three years Henry urged his suit, no -dispensation could be wrung from the pope. All that the pope would -grant was that the bishops might do “homage” to the crown for their -temporal rights. - -At last, in April, 1106, Anselm returned to England. The bishops -themselves, who had sided with the king against him, implored him to -return, so wretched had become the state of religion in England in his -absence. They promised to do his commands and to fight with him the -battle of the Lord. - -Henry, fresh from the conquest of Normandy, sent word of his good-will, -and of his desire for the archbishop’s presence. The long drawn-out -battle was over, and the king had to be content with “homage,” and to -resign the claim to investiture. - -“On August 1st (1107) an assembly of bishops, abbots, and chief men of -the realm, was held in London, in the king’s palace, and for three days -the matter of the investiture of churches was fully discussed between -the king and the bishops in Anselm’s absence. Then, in the presence of -Anselm and before the whole multitude, the king granted and decreed -that henceforth and for ever no one should be invested in England with -bishopric or abbey by staff and ring, either by the king or the hand -of any layman; while Anselm allowed that no one chosen for a bishopric -should be refused consecration for having done homage to the king. This -having been settled, the king, by the counsel of Anselm and the chief -men of the realm, appointed priests in nearly all those churches in -England which had long been widowed of their pastors.” (Eadmer.) - -Victory rested with Anselm. The old archbishop had done his best for -the liberty of religion, and by contending for this liberty he had -wrought for common freedom.[10] Later ages and struggles were to bring -out more clearly that some measure of political and social liberty -must follow the demand for freedom in religion. “Religious forces, -and religious forces alone, have had sufficient influence to ensure -practical realisation for political ideas.” (Figgis, _Studies of -Political Thought_.) - -Anselm’s life was nearly over, his work was accomplished, a -philosophical treatise “Concerning the agreement of Foreknowledge, -Predestination and the Grace of God with Free Will” was written with -difficulty in the last years. Then his appetite failed him, and all -food became loathsome. At last he was persuaded to take to his bed, and -on April 21st, 1109--the Wednesday of Holy Week--at daybreak Anselm -passed away. - -Anselm’s name has long been enrolled in the calendar of the saints -of the Church Catholic, no less is it to be cherished by all who -love liberty. Well may it be said of him, “he was ever a close -follower of Truth, and walked in noble companionship with Pity and -Courage.” Anselm’s plain good sense and charity were conspicuous in -his benediction of the marriage of Henry and Edith, but these great -qualities were earlier displayed when Lanfranc consulted him as to the -claims of the English Archbishop Ælphege to be canonised as a martyr. -Ælphege had been slain by the Danes for refusing to ransom his life at -the expense of his tenants; and Anselm replied to Lanfranc that he who -would die rather than oppress his tenants dies for justice’ sake, and -he who dies for justice dies a martyr for Christ. - -His sympathy and humaneness shone out a thousand times. There is the -story Eadmer tells of an abbot, who came to Anselm at Bec, and deplored -that he could do no good with the boys at his monastery. “In spite -of all we do they are perverse and incorrigible,” said the abbot, -despondently. “We are always beating them, but they only get worse: -and though we constrain them in every way we can, it’s all of no use.” -“_Constrain_ them!” answered Anselm. “Tell me, my lord abbot, when -you plant a tree in your garden, do you so tie it up that it cannot -stretch forth its branches? And if you did so, what sort of tree would -it become a few years hence when you released it? But this is just -what you do with your boys. You cramp them in with terrors and threats -and blows, so that it is quite impossible for them to grow or enjoy -any freedom. And kept down in this way their temper is spoilt by evil -thoughts of hatred and suspicion against you, and they put down all you -do to ill-nature and dislike. Why are you so harsh with them? Are they -not human beings of the same nature as yourself? How would you like to -be treated as you treat them?” The abbot was finally persuaded that -he had been all wrong. “We have wandered,” he said, “from the way of -truth, and the light of discretion hath not shone on us.” - -There is another story which gives Anselm’s pity and feeling of -kinship with the whole animal creation. It was when he was archbishop, -and was riding one day from Windsor to Hayes that a hare chased by the -dogs of some of his company took refuge under the feet of his horse. -Anselm at once pulled up and forebade the hare to be molested, and -when his escort laughed gleefully at the capture, the archbishop said: -“You may laugh, but it is no laughing matter for this poor unhappy -creature, which is like the soul of a departing man pursued by evil -spirits. Mortal enemies attack it, and it flies to us for its life: and -while it turns to us for safety we laugh.” He rode on, and in a loud -voice forbade the dogs to touch the hare; which, glad to be at liberty, -darted off to the fields and woods. - -That Anselm never wavered in his tenderness for the weak and oppressed -may be learnt from the great Church Synod held at Westminster in -1102--a council summoned on the strong request of the archbishop. The -slave trade was specially denounced at this council as a “wicked trade -used hitherto in England, by which men are sold like brute animals,” -and a canon was drawn up to that effect. - -Anselm’s enduring courage and desire for truth are conspicuous all -his life. He fought single-handed against both William and Henry, -and no weight of numbers, no world-wise talk from other prelates -could make him budge. If he withstood the Red King and his court at -Rockingham, equally firm was he in withstanding the Norman barons who -were inclined to break away from their sworn allegiance to Henry. No -Englishman by birth or blood was Anselm, for he was born at Aosta, and -spent the greater part of his life on the Continent, but he brought -to England the finest gifts of life, and gave them freely in service -to England’s liberty. He withstood an absolutism that threatened the -total enslavement of the nation, and the witness he bore to liberty -was taken up and renewed in the centuries that followed. “Anselm -was truly a great man. So good that he was held a saint in his very -lifetime, so meek that even his enemies honoured him, so wise that he -was the foremost thinker of his day, and the forerunner of the greatest -philosophers of ours.” (F. York Powell.) - - - - -Thomas of Canterbury - -The Defender of the Poor - -1162–1170 - - -AUTHORITIES: Benedict of Peterborough; Garnier; William FitzStephen; -John of Salisbury; Herbert of Bosham; Alan of Tewkesbury; Edward -Grim; Roger of Pontigny; William of Canterbury; Robert of -Cricklade--_Materials for the History of Thomas Becket_, 7 vols.; -_Thomas Saga_ (Icelandic), translated by Magnusson; Giraldus -Cambrensis; Gervase of Canterbury; William of Newburgh; Roger of -Hoveden, III.; Ralph Diceto (Rolls Series); Froude, R. H.--_Remains_, -Vol. 3; _Life of Becket_, by Canon J. C. Robertson; _Life of St. Thomas -Becket_, by John Morris, S.J.; Stubbs--_Constitutional History_, Vol. -I; Freeman--_Historical Essays_, 1st Series; W. H. Hutton--_English -History by Contemporary Writers_--_St. Thomas of Canterbury_. - -[Illustration: THOMAS A BECKET - -(_From an old Engraving after Van Eyck._)] - - - - -THOMAS OF CANTERBURY THE DEFENDER OF THE POOR - -1162–1170 - - -Fifty years after the death of Anselm the struggle with absolute -monarchy had to be renewed in England, and again the Archbishop of -Canterbury was the antagonist of the crown, standing alone for the most -part, as Anselm stood, in his resistance to autocracy. - -The contrast is great between the upbringing and character of Anselm -and of Thomas; but both men gave valiant service in the cause of -liberty in England, and both are placed in the calendar of the saints. -For Thomas and Anselm alike the choice was between the favour of -the King of England, the safe broad road of passive obedience, and -the following of the call of conscience on the craggy way of royal -displeasure; and to the everlasting honour of these two men, and of the -religion they professed, they chose the steep and narrow path with no -faltering step, and followed the gleam, heedless of this world’s glory, -heedless of life itself. - -Thomas was no monk as Anselm was, when the king nominated him for -the archbishopric of Canterbury. His early life was not spent in the -cloister but in the employment of a wealthy London sheriff, in the -office of Archbishop Theobald, at Lambeth, and as Chancellor of England. - -The son of gentle parents--his father Gilbert sometime -sheriff--“London citizens of the middle class, not usurers nor engaged -in business, but living well on their own income,” according to -FitzStephen, Thomas was the first Englishman to be made archbishop. -His gifts marked him out for high office. Theobald had sent him abroad -to study law at the great school at Bologna, and at the age of 36 made -him archdeacon of Canterbury, at that time “the dignity in the Church -of England next after the bishops and abbots, and which brought him an -hundred pounds of silver.” A year later, 1155, the young newly crowned -king, Henry II., on the advice of old Archbishop Theobald, made Thomas -the Chancellor. Theobald, anxious about the present, and apprehensive -for the future--for the king was very young, and those about him were -known to be hostile to the freedom of the Church and willing to treat -England as a conquered land--sought to prevent the evils which seemed -to be at hand by making Thomas a partner of the King’s counsels. He -could say, after ten years’ experience, that Thomas was high-principled -and prudent, wisely zealous for justice, and whole-hearted for the -freedom of the Church, and he held forth to the king on the wisdom, -the courage and the faithfulness of his archdeacon, “and the admirable -sweetness of his manners.” - -The appointment was made, nor could anyone say that it was ill done, or -that Theobald in his recommendation, or Henry II. in his acceptance, of -Thomas for the chancellorship could have done better for England. - -The chancellor was magnificent, and his dignity was accounted second -from the king. Nobles sent their children to Thomas to be trained in -his service. The king commended to him his son, the heir to the throne. -Barons and knights did homage to him. On his embassy to the French king -never had been seen such a retinue of followers, and such a lavish -display of the wealth and grandeur of England. The proud and mighty he -treated with harshness and violence. Yet it was said, by those who knew -him intimately, that he was lowly in his own eyes, and gentle and meek -to those who were humble in heart. And in the courts of kings, where -chastity is never commonly extolled, or purity of life the fashion, -Thomas, the chancellor, was known for his cleanness of living and his -unblemished honour. Many enemies he had, many who hated him for his -power; but never was breath of scandal uttered against the chancellor’s -private life, or suggestion made that the carnal lusts and appetites -which, unbridled, play havoc with men great and small, could claim -Thomas for their subject. - -He might be reproached by a monk for that he, being an archdeacon, -lived so secular a life, wearing the dress of a courtier, and charging -on the field with knights in France, but it could not be alleged that -church or realm suffered neglect from the chancellor. “By divine -inspiration and the counsel of Thomas, the lord king did not long -retain vacant bishoprics and abbacies, so that the patrimony of the -Crucified might be brought into the treasury, as was afterwards -done, but bestowed them with little delay on honourable persons, and -according to God’s law.” (W. FitzStephen.) - -The close friendship and warm affection of the king for his chancellor -were known to all. When the day’s business was done “they would play -together like boys of the same age.” They sat together in church and -hall and rode out together. “Never in Christian times were there two -men more of one mind or better friends.” It was natural on the death of -Archbishop Theobald, in 1161, that people should point to Thomas as his -successor, though the chancellor shrank, as Anselm had done, from the -post. - -“I know three poor priests in England any one of whom I would rather -see advanced to the archbishopric than myself,” he declared earnestly, -when his friend the prior of Leicester (who also remonstrated with him -for his unclerical dress) told him the rumours of the court. “For as -for me, if I was appointed, I know the king so through and through that -I should be forced either to lose his favour or, which God forbid, to -lay aside the service of God.” - -Thomas uttered the same warning to Henry when the king proposed the -primacy to him. “I know certainly,” he said, “that if God should so -dispose that this happen, you would soon turn away your love, and the -favour which is now between us would be changed into bitterest hate. I -know that you would demand many things in Church matters, for already -you have demanded them, which I could never bear quietly, and the -envious would take occasion to provoke an endless strife between us.” - -But Henry’s mind was made up. Residing largely in France, he would -have Thomas, Archbishop of Canterbury and Chancellor, to rule England -as his vice-regent. Six years had Thomas been the king’s friend and -chancellor, but the king did not know at all the real character of -his man, or rather it was inconceivable to the royal mind that -Thomas, whom the king had raised from a mere nobody, from Archdeacon -of Canterbury, an important ecclesiastic at best, to the chief man in -the realm, should ever dare set himself at variance with the king’s -will. Henry, with his untiring energy, was earnest enough for good -government in Church and State under an absolute monarchy, and he -counted on greater co-operation with Thomas in carrying out his plans, -were the latter archbishop. Hitherto, more than once the chancellor -had succeeded in moderating the king’s outbursts of wrath against some -hapless offender, but he had never shown himself a partisan of the -clergy at the expense of the commonwealth,[11] and his lack of pride in -his order had even incurred rebuke, so little of the ecclesiastic did -this statesman appear. - -Thomas understood the king better than the king understood his -chancellor. But his protests were in vain. He was as surely marked for -the archbishopric as Anselm had been. Bishops of the province approved -and the monks of Canterbury duly voted for the king’s chancellor in -common consent, Gilbert Foliot, the Bishop of Hereford, and afterwards -of London, and the archbishop’s enemy to the end, alone opposing the -election. - -“Then the archbishop-elect was by the king’s authority declared free of -all debts to the crown and given free to the Church of England, and in -that freedom he was received by the Church with the customary hymns and -words of praise.” (Herbert of Bosham.) - -On June 2nd, 1162, the Saturday after Whit Sunday, Thomas was -ordained priest and on the following day consecrated bishop. (The new -archbishop instituted the festival of Trinity Sunday to commemorate -his consecration, and some 200 years later the festival was made of -general observance in the Catholic Church.) The king realised the -mistake he had made within a year of the consecration. The brilliant -chancellor was no sooner archbishop than he turned from all the -gaieties of the world, and while no less a statesman, adopted the life -of his monks--though never himself a monk--at Canterbury. Henceforth -Archbishop Thomas was the unflinching champion of the poor and them -that had no helper, the resolute defender of the liberties of the -Church against all who would make religion subject to the autocracy of -the king of England. - -Thomas was forty-four years old, in the full strength of his manhood, -when he was made archbishop, and for eight years he did battle with the -crown, only laying down his charge at the call of martyrdom. - -The first disappointment to Henry was the resignation of the -chancellor’s seal.[12] It was clear to Thomas that he could no longer -serve the crown and do the work of a Christian bishop at the same -time, and he had accepted with full sense of responsibility the see of -Canterbury. There was no room for the egotism that loves power, the -vaulting ambition that o’erleaps itself, or even the self-deception -that persuades a man holding to high position at sacrifice of principle -that his motive is disinterested, in St. Thomas of Canterbury. More -than once England was to see in later years men who strove vainly to -serve with equal respect the Christian religion and the royal will--the -service always ended in the triumph of the latter. Thomas was far too -clearly-sighted to imagine such joint service possible, and for him, -elected and consecrated to the primacy of the English Church, there was -no longer any choice. As chancellor, keeping his conscience clear, he -had done the best he could for law and order as the king’s right hand -man. As Archbishop of Canterbury his duty, first and foremost, was to -maintain the Christian religion and defend the cause of the poor and -needy. - -But to Henry the resignation of the chancellorship was an act of -desertion, a declared challenge to the royal supremacy. Henry II. -was no more the man than his grandfather Henry I. had been to brook -anything that threatened resistance to the king’s rule. - -Courtiers who hated Thomas were always at hand to poison the ears -of the king by defaming the archbishop, and this, says William -FitzStephen, was the first cause of the trouble. Another cause was the -hatred of the king for the clergy of England, hatred provoked by the -notoriously disreputable lives of more than one clerk in holy orders. -The battle between Henry and Thomas began on this matter of criminous -clerks. - -William the Conqueror and Lanfranc recognizing that the Church, -strong and well ordered, made for national well-being, had set up -ecclesiastical courts wherein all matters affecting church law and -discipline were to be dealt with by the clergy, to the end that the -clergy should not be mixed up in lawsuits and should be excluded from -the lay courts. Henry II. was not satisfied that criminous clerks -were adequately dealt with in these ecclesiastical courts, where no -penalty involving bloodshed might be inflicted, and where the savage -punishments of mutilation had no place. Thomas was as anxious as the -king for the Church to be purged of abuses, but he was resolved not -to hand over offenders to the secular arm. The archbishop was an -ardent reformer. “He plucked up, pulled down, scattered and rooted -out whatever he found amiss in the vineyard of the Lord,” wrote a -contemporary; but he would shelter his flock as far as he could by the -canon law from the hideous cruelties of the King’s Courts.[13] It was -not for the protection of the clergy alone the archbishop was fighting -in the councils summoned by the king at Westminster in 1163, and at -Clarendon in 1164. - -“Ecclesiastical privileges were not so exclusively priestly privileges -as we sometimes fancy. They sheltered not only ordained ministers, -but all ecclesiastical officers of every kind; the Church Courts also -claimed jurisdiction in the causes of widows and orphans. In short, -the privileges for which Thomas contended transferred a large part of -the people, and that the most helpless part, from the bloody grasp of -the King’s Courts to the milder jurisdiction of the bishop.” (Freeman, -_Historical Essay_, First Series.) - -Before the climax of the dispute between Henry and Thomas was reached -at Clarendon, the archbishop had resisted the king in a matter of -arbitrary taxation--“the earliest recorded instance of resistance to -the royal will in a matter of taxation”[14]--and had fallen still -further in the king’s disfavour. - -Henry was at Woodstock, on July 1st, 1163, with the archbishop and the -great men of the land, and among other matters a question was raised -concerning the payment of a two shillings land tax on every hide of -land. This was an old tax dating from Saxon times, which William the -Conqueror had increased. It was paid to the sheriffs, who in return -undertook the defence of the county, and may be compared with the -county rates of our own day. The king declared this tax should in -future be collected for the crown, and added to the royal revenue; and -no one dared to question this decision until Archbishop Thomas arose -and told the king to his face that the tax was not to be exacted as -revenue, but was a voluntary offering to be paid to the sheriffs only -“so long as they shall serve us fitly and maintain and defend our -dependants.” It was not a tax that could be enforced by law. - -Henry, bursting with anger, swore, “By God’s Eyes” it should be given -as revenue, and enscrolled as a king’s tax. - -The archbishop replied with quiet determination, “aware lest by his -sufferance a custom should come in to the hurt of his successors,” -that, “by the reverence of those Eyes,” by which the king had sworn, -not one penny should be paid from his lands, or from the rights of -the Church. The king was silenced, no answer was forthcoming to the -objector, and the tax was paid as before to the sheriffs. But “the -indignation of the king was not set at rest,” and in October came the -Council of Westminster. - -The king at once demanded that criminous clerks should not only -be punished in the Church Courts by the sentence of deprivation, -but should further be handed over to the King’s Courts for greater -penalties, alleging that those who were not restrained from crime by -the remembrance of their holy orders would care little for the loss of -such orders. - -The archbishop replied quietly that this proposed new discipline was -contrary to the religious liberty of the land, and that he would never -agree to it. The Church was the one sanctuary against the barbarities -of the law, and Thomas to the end would maintain the security it -offered. More important it seemed to him that clerical offenders should -escape the king’s justice, than that all petty felons who could claim -the protection of the Church should be given over to mutilation by the -king’s officers. The bishops silently supported the primate in this -matter, though they told him plainly, “Better the liberties of the -Church perish than that we perish ourselves. Much must be yielded to -the malice of the times.” - -Thomas answered this pitiful plea by admitting the times were bad. -“But,” he added, “are we to heap sin upon sin? It is when the Church is -in trouble, and not merely when the times are peaceful, that a bishop -must cleave to the right. No greater merit was there to the bishops of -old who gave their blood for the Church than there is now to those who -die in defence of her liberties.” - -But the bishops were wavering, fearful of defying the king’s will. And -when Henry, defeated for the moment by the archbishop’s stand, angrily -called upon them to take an oath to observe in future “the royal -customs” of the realm as settled by his grandfather, Henry I., they all -agreed to do so, adding the clause “saving the rights of their order.” -The king objected, calling for the promise to be made “absolutely and -without qualifications,” until Thomas reminded him that the fealty the -bishops swore to give the crown “in life and limb and earthly honour” -was sworn “_salvo ordine suo_,” and that the “earthly honour” promise, -which included all the royal “customs” of Henry I., was not to be given -by bishops in any other way. - -It was now late at night, and the king broke up the council in anger, -leaving the bishops to retire as they would. - -Henry was resolved to abolish the Church Courts and destroy the -protection they afforded. He would have all brought under the severity -of his law, in spite of the archbishop. He knew the bishops were -wavering and were fearful of the royal displeasure. Thomas Becket, and -Thomas Becket alone, was the obstruction to the king’s schemes, and -firm as Becket might stand, the king would break down his opposition. - -The very day after Westminster the king demanded the resignation of all -the fortresses and honours Thomas had held under the crown since he had -been made chancellor, and these were surrendered at once. - -Then Henry tried a personal appeal, and once more the two met together -in a field near Northampton. Henry began by reminding Thomas of all he -had done for him. - -“Have I not raised you from a mean and lowly state to height of honour -and dignity? How is it after so many benefits and so many proofs of my -affection, which all have seen, you have forgotten these things, and -are now not only ungrateful, but my opponent in everything?” - -The archbishop answered: “Far be it from me, my lord. I am not -forgetful of the favours which God has conferred upon me at your -hands. Far be it from me to be so ungrateful as to resist your will -in anything so long as it is in accord with God’s will.” St. Thomas, -enlarging on the necessity of obedience to God rather than to men, -should the will of man clash with the will of God, the king at last -interrupted him impatiently with the intimation that he did not want a -sermon just then. - -“Are you not my man, the son of one of my servants?” - -“In truth,” the archbishop answered, “I am not sprung from a race of -kings. Neither was blessed Peter, the prince of the apostles, to whom -was committed the leadership of the Church.” - -“And in truth Peter died for his Lord,” said the king. - -“I too will die for my Lord when the time comes,” replied the -archbishop. - -“You trust too much to the ladder you have mounted by,” said the king. - -But the archbishop answered: “I trust in God, for cursed is the man -that putteth his trust in man.” Then the archbishop went on to remind -Henry of the proofs he had given of his fidelity in the years when he -was chancellor, and warned him that he would have done well to have -taken counsel with his archbishop concerning spiritual things than with -those who had kindled the flame of envy and vengeance against one who -had done them no wrong. - -The only reply the king gave was to urge that the Archbishop should -drop the words “saving their order” in promising to obey the royal -customs. - -The archbishop refused to yield, and so they parted.[15] - -At the close of the year the archbishop’s difficulties had been -increased by appeals on all sides to yield to the king. The bishops -were for peace at any price, and the Pope, Alexander III., threatened -by an anti-pope, and anxious for the good will of the king of England, -sent an abbot to Thomas urging him to give way, on the ground that -Henry only wanted a formal assent to the “customs” for the sake of his -dignity, and had no intention of doing anything harmful to the Church. - -Under these circumstances Thomas decided to yield. He went to the king -at Woodstock and declared that the obnoxious phrase, “saving our -order,” should be omitted from the promise to observe the “customs.” - -Without delay the king ordered his justiciar, Richard of Lucy, and his -clerk, Jocelin of Balliol, to draw up a list of the old “customs” and -liberties of his grandfather Henry I., and on the 29th of January, -1164, a great council was held at Clarendon to ratify the agreement -between the bishops and the king. - -Sixteen constitutions or articles were drawn up, and Thomas, -over-persuaded by the prayers of the bishops and the desire for peace, -gave his promise unconditionally to observe them. But no sooner had he -done so, and the articles were placed before him in black and white, -than he repented. - -The very first article declared that all disputes about Church -patronage were to be tried in the King’s Court, and was intolerable, -because while the State held it was a question of the rights of -property, the Church view was that the main point was the care of -souls, a spiritual matter for churchmen, not lawyers, to decide. - -The other articles which Thomas objected to, and which the pope -subsequently refused to ratify, decreed: (1) That clerks were to be -tried in the King’s Courts for offences of common law. (2) That neither -archbishops, bishops, nor beneficed clerks were to leave the kingdom -without the king’s license. (This, said St. Thomas, would stop all -pilgrimages and attendance at councils at Rome, and turn England into a -vast prison. “It was right enough to apply for the king’s leave before -the departure, but to bind one’s-self by an oath not to go without it -was against religion and was evil.”) (3) That no member of the king’s -household was to be excommunicated without the king’s permission. -(4) That no appeals should be taken beyond the archbishop’s court, -except to be brought before the king. (This was a definite attempt to -prohibit appeals to Rome, and Thomas pointed out that the archbishop on -receiving the pallium swore expressly not to hinder such appeals. The -acceptance of this article left the king absolute master.) - -The last article, declaring that serfs or sons of villeins were not to -be ordained without the consent of the lord on whose land they were -born, was not opposed by the pope, and the only contemporary objection -seems to have been raised by Garnier, a French monk and a biographer of -Thomas Becket.[16] - -Thomas had promised obedience to these constitutions, but he would not -put his seal to them. It seemed to him that it was not only the old -“customs” that had been drawn up, but rather a new interpretation of -these customs. The great Council of Clarendon was over. Thomas received -a copy of the constitutions and rode off, and the king had to be -content for the time with the promises delivered. - -In abject remorse Thomas wrote to the pope confessing his assent to -the Constitutions of Clarendon, and for forty days he abstained from -celebrating the mass. The pope, still anxious to prevent any open -rupture between the king and the archbishop, wrote in reply that -“Almighty God watches not the deed, but considers rather the intention -and judges the will,” and that Thomas was absolved by apostolic -authority. All the same, Pope Alexander III., without in any way -censuring Thomas, throughout the long struggle with Henry never stands -up roundly for the archbishop. - -Neither Henry nor Thomas could rest satisfied with Clarendon. The -archbishop had compromised for the sake of peace, but his quick -revulsion had provoked a keener hostility in the king. To Henry -it seemed the time had come to drive Thomas out of public life by -compelling him to resign the see of Canterbury. With Thomas out of the -way Henry could carry out his plans for a strong central government, -for bringing all under the pitiless arm of the law. Thomas was the -one man in the kingdom who dared offer resistance, and if Thomas was -no longer archbishop and some supple creature of the king was in his -place, the royal power would be absolute, for there seemed no fear of -any interference from Pope Alexander III. - -There were plenty of the archbishop’s enemies among the nobles at the -court ready to fan the king’s anger against Thomas, and by October, -1164, Henry was ready to crush the primate. - -Another council was summoned to meet at Northampton, and now Archbishop -Thomas was to learn the full significance of the Constitutions of -Clarendon. - -The first charge against Thomas was that he had refused justice to -John, the Treasurer-Marshal, who had taken up some land under the see -of Canterbury. John had taken his suit to the King’s Court, and Thomas -was further charged with contempt of the majesty of the crown for not -putting in a personal appearance at this court. The king now pressed -for judgment against the archbishop for this contempt, and the council -ordered that he should be condemned to the loss of all his moveable -property, and 500 pounds of silver was accepted as an equivalent fine. - -“It seemed to all that, considering the reverence due to the king -and by the obligation of the oath of homage, which the archbishop -had taken, and by the fealty to the king’s earthly honour which he -had sworn, he was in no way to be excused, because when summoned by -the king he had neither come himself, nor pleaded infirmity, or the -necessary work of his ecclesiastical office.” (W. FitzStephen). - -It was not easy to get the sentence pronounced against Thomas. Barons -and bishops were willing enough to stand well with the king, and they -agreed without contradiction to the fine. But the barons declined to -act as judge on a spiritual peer, and insisted that one of the bishops -must do this business. Henry, Bishop of Winchester, at last, on the -king’s order, pronounced the sentence. - -Thomas protested. “If I were silent at such a sentence posterity would -not be. This is a new form of sentence, no doubt in accordance with -the new laws of Clarendon. Never has it been heard before in England -that an Archbishop of Canterbury has been tried in the King’s Court -for such a cause. The dignity of the Church, the authority of his -person, the fact that he is the spiritual father of the king and of -all his subjects, require that he should be reverenced by all.” For -an archbishop to be judged by his suffragans was, he declared, for a -father to be judged by his sons. - -The bishops implored him to bow to the decree of the council, and -Thomas yielded, “not being willing that a mere matter of money should -cause strife between the king and himself.” - -The next day, Friday, October 9th, the king pressed Thomas more -fiercely, calling upon him to give account for large sums spent during -his chancellorship, and for various revenues of vacant churches during -that period. The total amount was 30,000 marks. - -In vain the archbishop urged that this demand was totally unexpected; -that he had not been summoned to Northampton to render such an account; -and that the justiciar, Richard, had declared that he was free of -all claims when he laid down the chancellorship. The king demanded -sureties, “and from that day barons and knights kept away from the -archbishop’s house--for they understood the mind of the king.” - -All Saturday Thomas was in consultation with the bishops, most of whom -expressed themselves strongly on the king’s side. Henry of Winchester -suggested the present of 2,000 marks to the king as a peace-offering, -and this was done. But the king would not have it. Hilary, of -Chichester, said, addressing the archbishop, “You ought to know the -king better than we do, for you lived with him in close companionship -and friendship when you were chancellor. Who is there who could be -your surety for all this money? The king has declared, so it is said, -that he and you cannot both remain in England as king and archbishop. -It would be much safer to resign everything and submit to his mercy. -God forbid lest he arrest you over these moneys of the chancellorship, -or lay hands on you.” One or two less craven urged the archbishop to -stand firm, as his predecessors had done, in the face of persecution. - -“Oh, that you were no longer archbishop and were only Thomas,” said -Hilary, putting the matter briefly. - -All Sunday was spent in consultations. On Monday the archbishop was -too ill to attend the council, but on Tuesday his mind was made up, -and when he entered the council it was with the full dignity of an -archbishop, carrying the cross of the archbishop in his hand. - -The bishops were in despair. There were all sorts of rumours in the -air. It was known the king was full of anger, and it was said that the -archbishop’s life was in danger. The bishops implored him to resign, -or else to promise complete submission to the councils of Clarendon. -They said he would certainly be tried and condemned for high treason -for disobedience to the king, and asked him what was the use of being -archbishop when he had the king’s hatred. - -Gilbert Foliot, Bishop of London, declared contemptuously of Thomas, -when someone asked him why he did not carry the archbishop’s cross for -him, “He always was a fool, and always will be.” - -Thomas had now only one answer to the bishops. He forbad them to take -any part in the proceedings against him, announced that he had appealed -to “our Mother, the Church of Rome, refuge of all the oppressed,” to -prevent any of them taking part, and ordered them to excommunicate any -who should dare lay secular hands upon the primate. - -Then, holding his cross, the archbishop took his usual place in the -council-chamber, while the king sat in an inner room. - -In the face of personal danger all the strength and courage of Thomas -Becket were aroused. He had yielded at Clarendon for the sake of peace, -and no good had come of it. He had submitted to be fined rather than be -involved in a miserable dispute about money, and now he was threatened -with demands for money which were beyond his resources. There was -nothing to prevent the king piling up greater and greater sums against -him, till hopeless ruin had been reached. He was powerless to withstand -such an onslaught. To Rome, “the refuge of all the oppressed,” would -Thomas appeal, and then, if it seemed well to the pope, he would retire -from Canterbury. But he would not surrender his post, however great -the wrath of the king, unless it were for the welfare of the Christian -Church. - -In the council-chamber Thomas sat alone, with one or two clergy -attending him, including Herbert of Bosham and William FitzStephen, -while the bishops went in to the king’s chamber. Among the nobles the -cry was going up that the archbishop was a perjurer and a traitor, -because, after signing at Clarendon, he now, in violation of those -constitutions, forbad bishops to give judgment in a case that did not -involve bloodshed, and had further made appeal to Rome. - -Then the king sent to know whether the archbishop refused to be bound -by the Constitutions of Clarendon, and whether he would find sureties -to abide by the sentence of the court regarding the accounts of his -chancellorship. - -Thomas again pointed out that he had not been called there to give -an account of his chancellorship, that on his appointment to the -archbishopric he had been declared by the king free of all secular -claims, and that he had forbidden the bishops to take part in any -judgment against him, and had appealed to Rome, “placing his person and -the church of Canterbury under the protection of God and the pope.” - -At the end of this speech the barons returned in silence to the king, -pondering the archbishop’s words. - -But hostile murmuring soon broke the silence, and Thomas could overhear -the barons grumbling that, “King William, who conquered England, knew -how to tame his clerks. He had put his own brother Odo in prison, and -thrown Stigand, Archbishop of Canterbury, into a dungeon.” - -The bishops renewed their pitiful chorus. Thomas had placed them -between the hammer and the anvil by his prohibition: of disobedience to -Canterbury on the one hand, and of the king’s anger on the other. They -had given their word at Clarendon, and now they were being forced to -go against the promises they had made. They, too, would appeal to Rome -against his prohibition, “lest you injure us still more.” - -All that Thomas could say was that the Constitutions of Clarendon had -been sent to the pope for confirmation, and had been returned, rather -condemned than approved. “This example has been given for our learning, -that we should do likewise, and be ready to receive what he receives -at Rome, and reject what he rejects. If we fell at Clarendon, through -weakness of the flesh, the more ought we to take courage now, and in -the might of the Holy Ghost contend against the old enemy of man.”[17] - -So bishops and nobles came and went between the king and the -archbishop, and the day drew on. Henry allowed the bishops to stand -apart from the judgment, and demanded sentence from the barons, and -Earl Robert of Leicester advanced as the spokesman of the council -to where the archbishop was sitting. The earl began to speak of the -judgment of the court, when Thomas rose and refused to hear him. - -“What is this you would do?” he cried. “Would you pass sentence on -me? Neither law nor reason permit children to pass sentence on their -father. You are nobles of the palace, and I am your spiritual father. -I will not hear this sentence of the king, or any judgment of yours. -For, under God, I will be judged by the pope alone, to whom before you -all here I appeal, placing the church of Canterbury with all thereto -belonging under God’s protection and the protection of the pope.” Then -he turned to the bishops. “And you, my brethren, who have served man -rather than God, I summon to the presence of the pope; and now, guarded -by the authority of the Catholic Church and the Holy See, I go hence.” - -So he passed out of the hall, no one gainsaying his passage, though -some plucked rushes from the floor and threw at him. There were shouts -of anger, and again the cries of “traitor” and “perjurer” were raised. -The archbishop turned on Earl Hamelin, the king’s brother, and Randulf -of Brok, who were calling “traitor,” and said sternly: “If I were not -a priest, my own arms should quickly prove your lie. And you, Randulf, -look at home (his cousin had lately been hanged for felony) before you -accuse the guiltless!” - -His horses were at the gate, and a great crowd that were afraid lest -the archbishop had been killed. St. Thomas mounted, and accompanied by -Herbert of Bosham, rode back to the monastery of St. Andrew, where he -had been lodging. The crowd thronged him and prayed for his blessing -all the way until the monastery was reached, and then he would have -the multitude come in to the refectory and dine with him. Of his own -retinue of forty who had come with him to Northampton, scarce six -remained; and so the places of those who had thought it safer to desert -their lord were filled by the hungry multitude. It was the archbishop’s -farewell banquet, and he, the constant champion of the poor, had those -whom he loved for his guests that day. - -At nightfall, after compline had been sung and the monks dispersed to -their cells, the archbishop, with three other men in the dress of lay -brothers, rode out from Northampton by the north gate, and at dawn were -at Grantham. Three weeks later Thomas had reached Flanders, and the -exile had begun which was only to end six years later when death was at -hand. - -It was useless to remain in England, hopeless as Thomas was of any -support from the bishops. He could but appeal, as Anselm had appealed, -to the one court that alone was recognised as owning a higher authority -than that of the kings of this world, the court of Rome. - -But Pope Alexander, still harassed by an anti-pope set up by the -Emperor Frederick, could do as little for Thomas as his predecessor -had done for Anselm, though he refused to allow him to resign the -archbishopric. Unlike Anselm, Thomas vigorously carried on his contest -with the king from the friendly shelter of King Louis of France, and -Henry retaliated without hesitation, driving out of England all the -friends and kinsmen of Thomas, to the number of four hundred, and -threatening a like banishment to the Cistercian monks, because Thomas -had taken refuge in their monastery at Pontigny. - -The fear that the pope would allow the archbishop to pronounce an -interdict against England, and a sentence of personal excommunication -against its king, drove Henry in 1166 to appeal himself to the pope. -“Thus by a strange fate it happened that the king, while striving for -those ‘ancient customs,’ by which he endeavoured to prevent any right -of appeal (to the pope), was doomed to confirm the right of appeal for -his own safety.” (John of Salisbury.) - -Months and years passed in correspondence. More than once Henry and -Thomas met at the court of Louis, but neither would yield. The pope, -without blaming the archbishop, and without sanctioning any extreme -step against Henry, did what he could to make peace between them. - -At last, in the summer of 1170, the king really was disturbed by the -fear of an interdict, for his last act against Archbishop Thomas had -been to have his son crowned by the Archbishop of York, in defiance of -all the rights and privileges of the see of Canterbury. Besides this, -Louis was threatening war because his daughter, who was married to the -young King Henry, had not been crowned with her husband. Henry hastened -over to France and made friends with Thomas, and the reconciliation -took place at Freteral. The king solemnly promised that the archbishop -should enjoy all the possessions and rights of which he had been -deprived in his exile, and that his friends and kinsmen should all be -allowed to return home. He even apologised for the coronation of his -son. It seemed as if the old friendship had been revived. “We conversed -together until the evening as familiarly as in the days of our ancient -friendship. And it was agreed I should arrange my affairs and then make -some stay with the king before embarking for England; that the world -might know how thoroughly we are restored to his favour and intimacy. -We are not afraid that the king will not fulfil his promises, unless -he is misled by evil counsellors.” So Thomas wrote to the pope in -July, 1170. Yet there were many--including King Louis--who doubted the -sincerity of the reconciliation, for Henry was not willing to give the -kiss of peace to his archbishop. - -On December 1st Thomas landed at Sandwich, and went at once to -Canterbury. The townspeople and the poor of the land welcomed him with -enthusiastic devotion. “Small and great, old and young, ran together, -some throwing themselves in his way, others crying and exclaiming, -‘Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.’ In the same manner -the clergy and their parishioners met him in procession, saluting -their father and begging his blessing.... And when all things in the -cathedral was solemnly ended, the archbishop went to his palace, and so -ended that joyful and solemn day.” (Herbert of Bosham.) - -But against the affection and goodwill of his own people at Canterbury, -and a similar demonstration of rejoicing by multitudes of clergy -and people in London, Thomas had to face the fact that the bishops -generally hated his return, that the young Prince Henry, recently -crowned, who had been his pupil, refused to see him and ordered his -return to Canterbury, and that the nobles openly spoke of him as a -traitor to the king. “This is a peace for us which is no peace, but -rather war,” said the archbishop bitterly. - -The end was not far off. Thomas, as zealous for good discipline in the -Church as Henry was for strong authority in the State, was no sooner -returned than he was asked to withdraw the sentence of excommunication -against the Archbishop of York and the Bishops of London and Salisbury. -He promised to do this if the bishops on their part would promise to -submit to the decision of the pope on the matter. London and Salisbury -were moved to receive absolution on these terms, but Roger, of York, -who had always been against Becket, dissuaded them, urging them to -throw themselves on the protection of the king, and threatening Thomas -“with marvellous and terrible things at the hands of the king” unless -he relented. Naturally, these threats left the archbishop undisturbed, -and Roger of York, with Gilbert Foliot of London and Jocelin of -Salisbury, at once hastened over to France to lay their case before the -king. - -These bishops were not the only men who troubled Thomas in these last -days. Randulf de Broc, with others of his family, and certain knights, -all known as strong “king’s men,” “sought every means to entangle him -in a quarrel,” and did not stop from robbing a ship belonging to the -archbishop and from seizing a number of horses, and mutilating one of -them. Thomas replied by excommunicating Randulf and Robert de Broc, the -boldest of these offenders. - -At Christmas more than one of the archbishop’s followers warned him -that his life was in danger, and Thomas seems to have realised that his -position was hazardous. But he would not fly. - -Already his murderers were at hand. - -The excommunicated bishops had reached the king at Bur, near Bayeux, -had told their story, and had coloured it with a fanciful description -of Thomas making a circuit of England at the head of a large body of -men.[18] Someone had said, “My lord, as long as Thomas lives, you will -have neither peace nor quiet in your kingdom, nor will you ever see -good days;” and at this Henry had burst out into a terrible rage of -bitterness and passion, for such fits at times took possession of him, -“Here is a man,” he cried out, “who came to my court a sorry clerk, -who owes all he has to me, and insults my kingdom and lifts his heel -against me. And not one of the cowardly sluggish knaves, whom I feed -and pay so well, but suffers this, nor has the heart to avenge me!” - -The words were spoken, and four of the king’s knights--Reginald -FitzUrse, William of Tracy, Hugh of Morville, and Richard the -Breton--hearing what was said, and that Roger of York had declared “as -soon as Thomas is dead all this trouble will be ended, and not before,” -at once departed. They sailed from different ports and met together at -Saltwood, the castle of the Brocs, on December 28th. The following day -they rode on to Canterbury, taking with them twelve of Randulf’s men -and Hugh of Horsea, who was called the Evil Deacon. - -The king, on finding the four knights had left the court, gave -orders to have them stopped, but it was too late. They were then at -Canterbury, and entering the hospitable doors of the palace had made -direct for the archbishop’s private chamber. - -It was four o’clock. Dinner had been at three, and Thomas was sitting -on his bed talking to John of Salisbury, Edward Grim, and a few other -friends. When the knights entered, Thomas recognized Reginald, William, -and Hugh, for they had served under him years before, and waited for -them to speak. - -Reginald FitzUrse was the spokesman. He declared they had come from -the king, that Thomas must take an oath of fealty to the newly-crowned -prince, and must absolve the excommunicated bishops. Thomas answered -that the bishops might have been absolved on their willingness to obey -the judgments of the Church, and that the king had sanctioned what had -been done at their reconciliation. - -Reginald denied there had been any reconciliation, and swore that -Thomas was imputing treachery to the king in saying such a thing. - -The archbishop pointed out that the reconciliation had taken place in -public, and that Reginald himself had been present. - -Reginald swore he had never been there, and had not heard of it. And -at this the other knights broke in, swearing again and again, by God’s -wounds, that they had borne with him far too long already. - -Then Thomas reminded them of the insults and losses he had endured, -especially at the hands of the De Brocs, since his return. - -Hugh of Morville answered him that he had his remedy in the King’s -Courts, and ought not to excommunicate men on his own authority. - -“I shall wait for no man’s leave to do justice on any that wrong the -Church and will not give satisfaction,” Thomas replied. - -“What do you threaten us! Threats are too much!” cried Reginald -FitzUrse. - -Then the knights bit their gloves and angrily defied the archbishop. - -Thomas told them that they could not intimidate him. “Once I went away -like a timid priest; now I have returned, and I will never leave again. -If I may do my office in peace, it is well: if I may not, God’s will be -done.” Then he turned to remind them they had once sworn fealty to him -when he was chancellor. - -“We are the king’s men,” they shouted out, “and owe fealty to no one -against the king!” - -Bidding his servants keep the archbishop within the precincts on peril -of their lives, the knights withdrew. - -“It is easy to keep me,” said Thomas, “for I shall not go away. I will -not fly for the king or for any living man.” - -“Why did you not take counsel with us and give milder answer to your -enemies?” said John of Salisbury. “You are ready to die, but we are -not. Think of our peril!” - -“We must all die,” the archbishop answered, “and the fear of death must -not turn us from doing justice.” - -Word was quickly brought in that the knights were putting on their -armour in the courtyard, and the monks, frightened at the sight of -these men with drawn swords entering the orchard to the west of the -cathedral, rushed to the archbishop and implored him to fly to the -cathedral. Thomas smiled at their terror, saying, “All you monks are -too cowardly, it seems to me.” And not till vespers had begun would he -leave for the minster. The knights broke into the cloisters after him, -and reaching St. Benet’s chapel began to hammer at the door, which for -safety the monks had barred behind them. - -Thomas at once ordered the door to be unbolted, saying, “God’s house -shall not be made a fortress on my account.” He slipped back the iron -bar himself, and the angry knights rushed in with cries of “Where is -the traitor? Where is the archbishop?” - -It was five o’clock and a dark winter’s night. Had Thomas chosen, he -could easily have escaped death by concealing himself in the crypt or -in one of the many hiding places in the cathedral. But he felt his -hour had come and met it without faltering. John of Salisbury and the -rest of the monks and clerks vanished away and hid themselves, leaving -only Edward Grim, Robert of Merton and William FitzStephen with the -archbishop. Soon only Grim was left, when the archbishop came out -boldly, and standing by a great pillar near the altar of St. Benedict, -answered his accusers. “Here I am: no traitor, Reginald, but your -archbishop.” - -They tried to drag him from the church, but he clung to the great -pillar, with Edward Grim by his side. For the last time Reginald called -on him to come out of the church. “I am ready to die, but let my people -go, and do not hurt them,” was the archbishop’s answer. William Tracy -seized hold of him, but Thomas hurled him back. Upon that FitzUrse -shouted, “Strike! strike!” And Tracy cut savagely at the head of the -archbishop. Grim sprang forward and the blow fell on his arm, and he -fell back badly wounded. - -Then Thomas commended his cause and that of the Church to St. Denis and -the patron saints of the cathedral, and his soul to God, and without -flinching bowed his head to his murderers. FitzUrse, Tracy and Richard -the Breton struck the archbishop down, and Hugh the Evil Deacon mangled -in brutal fashion the head of St. Thomas before calling out to the -others: “Let us go now; he will never rise again!” - -Then they all rushed from the church, and shouting, “King’s knights! -King’s knights!” proceeded to plunder the palace. They fled north that -night to the castle of Hugh of Morville at Knaresborough, where for -a time they lived in close retirement. Tracy subsequently went on a -pilgrimage to Rome and Palestine, but all four “within two years of the -murder were living at court on familiar terms with the king.”[19] - -Henry and all his court were horrified when the news was brought -of the archbishop’s martyrdom, for all the people proclaimed the -murdered prelate a saint and a martyr, and “a martyr he clearly -was, not merely to the privileges of the Church or to the rights of -the see of Canterbury, but to the general cause of law and order as -opposed to violence.”[20] Had St. Thomas yielded in the matter of the -excommunicated bishops, and sought favour with the king at the expense -of the liberties and discipline of the Church, and had he given way -to the savage, lawless turbulence of the king’s knights, he would not -only have escaped a violent death, but might have lived long in the -sunshine of the royal pleasure. He chose the rougher, steeper road, -daring all to save the Church and the mass of the English people from -being brought under the iron heel of a king’s absolute rule, and he -paid the penalty, pouring out his blood on the stones of the minster at -Canterbury to seal the vows he had taken when he first entered the city -as archbishop. - -In his dying St. Thomas was even stronger than in his life. Henry -hastened to beg the forgiveness of Rome for his rash words that had -provoked the murder, and in the presence of the pope’s legates in -Normandy promised to give up the Constitutions of Clarendon and to -stand by the papacy against the emperor. Nor did he make any further -attempt in his reign to bring the Church under the subjection of the -crown, but built up a great system of legal administration, which in -substance exists to-day. - -St. Thomas was canonised four years after his death. “There was no -shadow of doubt in men’s minds that here was one who was a martyr as -fully as any martyr of the catacombs and the Roman persecutions.” (R. -H. Benson, _St. Thomas of Canterbury_.) Countless miracles were alleged -to prove the sanctity of the dead hero, and pilgrims from all parts -made their way to the shrine of the “blessful martyr” at Canterbury. -Not only in England, but in France and Flanders, and particularly in -Ireland was there an outburst of devotion to St. Thomas. - -The shrine at Canterbury was destroyed by Henry VIII., who after a mock -trial of the archbishop slain more than 300 years earlier, declared -that “Thomas, sometime Archbishop of Canterbury, had been guilty of -contumacy, treason and rebellion,” and “was no saint, but rather a -rebel and traitor to his prince.” - -But though Thomas, canonised by the pope on the prayers of the people -of England, could be struck out of the calendar of the Church of -England by the arbitrary will of King Henry VIII., as an enemy of -princes, and his shrine destroyed, it is beyond the power of a king -to reverse the sentence of history or to blast for ever the fame of -a great and courageous champion of the poor of this land. Time makes -little of the insults of Henry VIII. Thomas of Canterbury died for the -religion that in his day protected the people against the despotism of -the crown. “He was always a hater of liars and slanderers and a kind -friend to dumb beasts (hence his rage with De Broc for mutilating a -horse) and all poor and helpless folk.” (F. York Powell.) - -That Henry II. strove to make law predominant in the spirit of a great -statesman is as true as that Thomas strove to mitigate the harshness of -the law. As a writer of the twelfth century put it: “Nothing is more -certain than that both strove earnestly to do the will of God, one for -the sake of his realm, the other on behalf of his Church. But whether -of the two was zealous in wisdom is not plain to man, who is so easily -mistaken, but to the Lord, who will judge between them at the last -day.” - - - - -William FitzOsbert, called Longbeard - -The First English Agitator - -1196 - - -AUTHORITIES: Roger of Hoveden; William of Newburgh; Gervase of -Canterbury; Matthew Paris; Ralph Diceto; (Rolls Series); _Rotuli Curiæ -Regis_ (Sir F. Palgrave. Vol. I.). - - - - -WILLIAM FITZOSBERT CALLED LONGBEARD, THE FIRST ENGLISH AGITATOR - -1196 - - -When Richard I., on his accession, picked out Hubert Walter, Bishop -of Salisbury, to be Archbishop of Canterbury, he chose a prelate whom -he could rely upon as his representative. Hubert had been a crusader; -he was the nephew of Ralph Glanville--who sold the justiciarship to -William Longchamp, Bishop of Ely, for £3,000, and followed Richard to -Palestine, dying of the plague at Acre in 1191--and though a man of -little learning he was a capital lawyer, a strong administrator and -expert at raising money for the king.[21] Hubert was no champion of -the poor as St. Thomas had been, no preacher of righteousness like St. -Anselm, no stickler for the rights of the Church or the liberties of -the people; he was “the king’s man,” and “forasmuch as he was neither -gifted with a knowledge of letters nor endued with the grace of lively -religion, so in his days the Church of England was stifled under the -yoke of bondage.” (Geraldus Cambrensis.) - -Richard Cœur de Lion, occupied with the crusades, had no mind for the -personal government of England. He depended on his ministers for money -to pay for his military expeditions to Palestine. England was to him -nothing more than a subject province to be bled by taxation. Both -William Longchamp and Hubert Walter--to whom Richard committed the -realm when he left England for good in 1194--did all that could be done -to meet the king’s demands. Government offices, earldoms and bishoprics -were sold to the highest bidder.[22] Judges bought their seats on the -bench and cities bought their charters. Crown lands already granted to -tenants were again taken up by the king’s authority, and the occupier -compelled to pay for readmission to his holding. Tournaments were -revived, because everyone taking part was obliged to take a royal -license. Even the great seal was broken by the justiciar’s authority, -and all documents signed by it had to be reissued, with the payment -of the usual fees (or stamp duties) for new contracts. “By these and -similar inquisitions England was reduced to poverty from one sea to the -other,” for more than £1,000,000 was sent to Richard by Hubert in the -first two years of his justiciarship. - -The only protest against the general distress came from London, and not -from the aldermen or burghers, but from the voteless labouring people -upon whom the whole burden of raising the city’s taxes had been thrown. -Against this monstrous injustice William Longbeard FitzOsbert stood -out as the spokesman of the poor of London, and died a martyr for -their cause. - -London’s political importance had been seen in the struggles against -King Cnut and William the Conqueror. Its remarkable influence in -national politics (an influence that endured to the middle of the -nineteenth century) was manifest when London acclaimed Stephen as King -of England in 1135. At the close of the twelfth century, London, with -the civic charter it had just obtained from Richard, with its thirteen -convent churches and more than a hundred parish churches within its -boundaries, with its great cattle market at Smithfield and its growing -riverside trade, was already prosperous and overcrowded. “The city was -blessed with the healthiness of the air and the nature of its site, in -the Christian religion, in the strength of its towers, the honour of -its citizens and the purity of its women; it was happy in its sports -and fruitful of high spirited men.” It had its darker side, but at that -time “the only plagues were the intemperate drinking of foolish people -and the frequent fires.” - -Richard’s charter left to the citizens the business of assessing their -own taxes, and in 1196 there was trouble over this matter; for in -that year the city fathers decided that the large sums required by -Archbishop Hubert for the king’s needs should be paid in full by the -poorer craftsmen and labourers, who had no say in the matter.[23] - -“And when the aldermen assembled according to usage in full hustings -for the purpose of assessing the taxes, the rulers endeavoured to spare -their own purses and to levy the whole from the poor.” (Roger of -Hoveden.) - -Whereupon up rose William Longbeard, the son of Osbert, and made his -memorable protest against these rascally proceedings, to go down to -history as the first popular agitator in England. - -An exceptional man was this Longbeard, a man of commanding stature and -great strength, ready witted, something of an orator and a lawyer, who -“burning with zeal for righteousness and fair play made himself the -champion of the poor,” holding that every man, rich or poor, should pay -his share of the city’s burdens according to his means. - -Longbeard was not of the labouring people himself. He was a member of -the city council, though by no means a rich man. He had distinguished -himself as a crusader in 1190, making the journey to Portugal against -the Moors; and a vision of St. Thomas Becket had appeared to him and -his fellow Londoners when their ship was beset by storms off the coast -of Spain. - -Longbeard was known to the king, and he was already hateful to the -ruling class because he had declared that Richard was being defrauded -by financial corruption of the money raised for the crown. He had also -accused his brother of treason in 1194, but the case was not proved. - -Richard was in Normandy in 1196, and Longbeard having banded together -15,000 men in London, under an oath that they would stick by him and -each other, went to the king and laid their grievances before him. -Richard heard the appeal sympathetically enough, for after all, as -long as the money was forthcoming, he had no particular desire that -the pockets of rich burghers should be spared at the expense of the -poor, but left matters in the hands of Archbishop Hubert the justiciar. -Longbeard returned to London, and with his 15,000[24] workmen in -revolt, bid an open defiance to the justiciar. - -Only a fragment of one of Longbeard’s speeches has been preserved, a -solitary specimen of popular oratory in the twelfth century.[25] - -Taking a passage from the prophet Isaiah for his text: “Therefore with -joy shall ye draw water from the wells of the Saviour” (Isaiah xii, 3), -the agitator delivers his message. - -“I am,” he saith, “the saviour of the poor. You the poor, who have -endured the hard hands of the rich, draw ye from my wells the waters of -sound doctrine, and this with joy, for the time of your visitation is -at hand. For I will divide the waters from the waters, and the People -are the waters. I will divide the humble and faithful from such as are -proud and froward. I will divide the just from the unjust, even as -light from darkness.” - -For a time Longbeard was too strong for the justiciar. Archbishop -Hubert had no force at his disposal for the invasion of London, for a -battle with Longbeard and his league. - -At a great gathering of citizens, held in St. Paul’s Churchyard, the -justiciar’s men sent to arrest Longbeard had been driven out of the -city with violence. All that Hubert could do was to give orders for -the arrest of any lesser citizens found outside London, and two small -traders from the city actually were taken into custody at the town of -Stamford on Mid-Lent Sunday, 1196, under this authority. - -But the aldermen grew more and more frightened at Longbeard’s bold -speeches and his big public meetings, and weakness and cowardice began -to demoralise the league. The people, who had risen for “liberty and -freedom,” fell away from their leader, and FitzOsbert was left with a -comparatively small band to face the anger of the justiciar. - -Backed up by the city fathers, Hubert’s officers again attempted to -seize the agitator. Longbeard, hardly pressed, snatched an axe from -one of his assailants--a citizen named Godfrey--and slew him; and then -retreated, overwhelmed by numbers, to take refuge in the church of -St. Mary-le-Bow in Cheapside. There was a right of sanctuary in this -church, a right not to be denied to the commonest felon. - -But what were rights of sanctuary to the justiciar--bent on hunting his -prey to the death? He commanded Longbeard “to come out and abide by the -law,” and gave orders to his men that, failing instant obedience, he -was to be dragged out. - -Longbeard’s answer was to climb up into the church tower, and thereupon -Hubert ordered the tower to be set on fire, and this was done. And now -the only chance of life for William Longbeard and his followers was to -cut their way through the host of their enemies and make a bold rush -for safety. It was a remote chance at the best, but sooner that than to -perish in the burning tower. - -At the very church door Longbeard was struck down--some say by -Godfrey’s son--and his little company were quickly slain or taken -prisoners. Loaded with chains, the once bold advocate of the poor of -London, now badly hurt, was at once haled off to the Tower. Sentence -was pronounced without delay of the law, William, the son of Osbert, -was to be dragged to the elms at Tyburn and there hanged in chains. - -A few days later--it was just before Easter--the wounded man was -stripped naked, tried to the tail of a horse and dragged over the rough -stones of the streets of London. He was dead before Tyburn was reached, -but the poor broken body, on whom the full vengeance of the rich and -mighty had been wreaked, was strung up in chains beneath the gallows -elm all the same. Bravely had Longbeard withstood the rulers of the -land in the day of his strength; now, when life had passed from him, -his body was swinging in common contempt. And with him were nine of his -followers hanged. - -So died William, called Longbeard, son of Osbert, “for asserting the -truth and maintaining the cause of the poor.” And since it is held that -to be faithful to such a cause makes a man a martyr, people thought he -deserved to be ranked with the martyrs. For a time multitudes--the very -folk who had fallen away from their champion in the hour of battle and -need--flocked to pay reverence to the ghastly, bloodstained corpse that -hung at Tyburn, and pieces of the gibbet and of the bloodstained earth -beneath were carried off and counted as sacred relics. All the great, -heroic qualities of the man were recalled. He was accounted a saint. -Miracles were alleged to take place when his relics were touched. - -Then the dead man’s enemies were aroused, an alleged death-bed -confession was published, wherein Longbeard was made out to be a sorry -criminal. Not the least of the offences laid to his charge was that a -woman, who was not his wife, had stood faithfully by the rebel, even -when the church was on fire. - -The times were rough. It is probable that Longbeard, crusader and -fighting man, had sins enough to confess before death took him. But -his traducers were silent as to these sins in the man’s lifetime. They -waited until no answer could be given before uttering their miserable -libels against the one courageous champion of the poor. - -Longbeard had roused the common working people to make a stand against -obvious oppression and injustice--there was the head and front of his -offending, there was his crime; earning for him not only a felon’s -death, but the loss of character, and the branding for all time with -the contemptuous title “Demagogue.” - -Yet in the slow building up of English liberties William FitzOsbert -played his part, and laid down his life in the age-long struggle for -freedom, as many a better has done. - -In 1198, two years after the death of Longbeard, Hubert was compelled -to resign the justiciarship. His monks at Canterbury, to whom the -Church of St. Mary, in Cheapside, belonged, and who had no love for -their archbishop,[26] indignant at the violation of sanctuary and the -burning of their church, appealed to the king and to the pope, Innocent -III. to make Hubert give up his political activities and confine -himself to the work of an archbishop. In the same year a great council -of the nation, led by St. Hugh of Lincoln, flatly refused a royal -demand for money made by Hubert. - -Innocent III. was against him, the great barons were against him, and -Hubert resigned. But he held the archbishopric till 1205. - - - - -Stephen Langton and the Great Charter - -1207–1228 - - -AUTHORITIES: Roger of Wendover and Matthew Paris; Walter of Coventry; -Ralph of Coggeshall (Rolls Series); _Letters of Innocent III._; Rymer’s -_Fœdera_; K. Norgate--_John Lackland_; Stubbs--_Select Charters_; -Mark Pattison--_Stephen Langton_ (Lives of the English Saints); C. E. -Maurice--_Stephen Langton_. - - - - -STEPHEN LANGTON AND THE GREAT CHARTER - -1207–1228 - - -When Hubert Walter, Archbishop of Canterbury--the old Justiciar of -Richard I.--ended his long life of public service on July 12th, A.D. -1205, King John exclaimed, with frank satisfaction, “Now for the first -time I am King of England!” As long as Hubert was alive there was one -man strong enough to restrain the king, and the primate and William -the Marshall together had done something to guard England against the -foulest and most ruthless tyranny of all its kings. To the end William -the Marshall was a brave and patriotic statesman, but he served the -crown rather than the people. - -On Hubert’s death John meant to have for archbishop a creature of -his will, and he was defeated by Pope Innocent III., who, dismissing -the appeal of the monks of Canterbury for Reginald, their subprior, -and John’s appeal for his nominee, John de Gray, Bishop of Norwich, -proposed the English-born Cardinal, Stephen Langton, “than whom there -was no man greater in the Roman court, nor was there any equal to -him in character and in learning.” The monks consented to Stephen’s -appointment, but John’s reply was a flat refusal, and when on June -7th, 1207, Pope Innocent proceeded to consecrate Stephen Langton -Archbishop of Canterbury, the king’s rage broke out. Innocent’s wise -judgment gave England one of its noblest and greatest archbishops, and -the service wrought by Langton for the liberties of England’s people -was of deep and lasting value. But the immediate price to be paid for -later profit was heavy. - -John met Langton’s consecration by seizing the estates of Canterbury, -driving the chapter into exile, and proclaiming that anyone who -acknowledged Stephen as archbishop should be accounted a public enemy. -The remonstrances and warnings of the pope were disregarded, and in -March, 1208, all England was laid under an interdict, and there was -an end to the public ministrations of religion in the country for six -years--to the bitter distress of the common people. - -Immediately the interdict came into force, John declared all the -property of the clergy, secular or monastic, to be confiscated, and -there was no one to stay his hand from speedy spoliation. For the -barons were willing enough to see the clergy robbed and the king’s -treasury filled at the expense of the Church, and of the bishops only -two were left in England--Peter des Roches, of Winchester, and John -de Gray, of Norwich--and both these were willing tools of the king. -Never did John enjoy his royal will and pleasure with such unhindered -ferocity as in that year 1209. Had the barons stood by the Church they -might have saved England unspeakable miseries, and as it was the laity -were soon in as sorry a plight as the clergy, “and it seemed as though -the king was courting the hatred of every class of his subjects, so -burdensome was he to both rich and poor.”[27] - -In 1211 came Pandulf from Pope Innocent with suggestions for peace. Let -the king restore the property of the clergy, and receive Archbishop -Langton, with his kinsmen and friends, and the other exiled bishops -“fairly and in peace” and the interdict should be withdrawn. John -declined to receive Langton as archbishop, and Pandulf, in the presence -of the whole council, pronounced the papal sentence of excommunication -on the king, absolving all his subjects from allegiance, and commanding -their obedience to whomsoever should be sent as John’s successor. - -John treated the excommunication with cheerful contempt, and pursued -the evil tenour of his way. But his position was precarious, for the -barons--especially the northern barons--were plotting his overthrow, -and the pope had decided that Philip of France should depose John and -reign in his stead. John was driven to capitulate to the pope at the -end of 1212, and in May, 1213, Pandulf arrived, and the invasion by -Philip was stopped, to the exceeding annoyance of the French king. - -John met the papal legate at Ewell, near Dover, and in the presence -of “the great men of the realm,” swore to carry out all Innocent’s -demands, promising that Stephen should be received and recompense paid -to the clergy for their losses. Then the King of England formally -surrendered “to God and to the Holy Mother Church of Rome, and to Pope -Innocent and his Catholic successors,” the whole realm of England and -Ireland, “with all rights thereunto appertaining, to receive them back -and hold them thenceforth as a feudatory of God and the Roman Church.” -He swore fealty to the pope for both realms, and added that he would -send a yearly tribute of 1,000 marks. At the same time John declared -that the act of homage was voluntary, done, “not at the driving of -force nor the compulsion of fear, but of our own good free will and by -the common counsel of our barons.” - -There is no evidence that the pope asked for this abject submission, -but there are good reasons why John desired that political protection -of the papacy which he obtained by the act of homage.[28] (Matthew -Paris has a story that John was willing to pay homage and tribute to -the Mohammedan Emir of Morocco in order to effect an alliance with some -foreign power.) - -The barons themselves appealed to the pope two years later to take -their part against John, on the ground that it was only by their -compulsion the king had been brought to pay homage to Rome, and -though they were then to curse the papal overlordship they had helped -procure, and England was to come to regard John’s surrender to the -pope as “a thing to be detested for all time,” in that year 1213 the -protection of the pope was invaluable to John and, as some thought, to -the country. “For matters were in such a strait, and so great was the -fear on all sides, that there was no more ready way of avoiding the -imminent peril--perhaps no other way at all. For when once he had put -himself under apostolical protection and made his realms a part of the -patrimony of St. Peter, there was not in the Roman world a sovereign -who durst attack him or would invade his lands, in such awe was Pope -Innocent held above all his predecessors for many years past.” (Walter -of Coventry.) - -The long war being at an end Stephen Langton and four of the exiled -bishops landed in June, and Stephen was now to do the work of -archbishop, the work he had been solemnly consecrated to six years -before. - -John met the primate at Winchester, and swore on the gospels in -the cathedral “that he would cherish, defend and maintain the holy -Church and her ordained ministers; that he would restore the good -laws of his forefathers, especially St. Edward’s, rendering to all -men their rights; and that before the next Easter he would make full -restitution of all property which had been taken away in connection -with the interdict.” Then Stephen formally absolved the king from -excommunication and gave him the kiss of peace, to the general -rejoicing. - -And now England was to see what sort of archbishop it was Pope Innocent -had sent to Canterbury. With a king as cruel as he was vigorous, and -as astute as he was unscrupulous, with barons who knew neither loyalty -nor patriotism. Archbishop Stephen, out of such materials, was to win -for his native land the Great Charter, and to have it written in black -and white that all who would might read the several duties of king and -people. In August Langton, in St. Paul’s Cathedral, read to the barons -the old coronation charter of Henry I., and reminded them that the -liberties promised in that document were to be recovered. “With very -great joy the barons swore they would fight for these liberties, even -unto death if it were needful, and the archbishop promised that he -would help with all his might.” Thus within three months of his setting -foot in England Langton had started the movement for the Great Charter. - -But not with king and barons only had the archbishop to deal. There -were endless difficulties with the clergy concerning the restitution -of their property, and the payment of compensation to be settled. And -above all there was Nicholas, the papal legate, in England, usurping -the primate’s functions, filling up vacant bishoprics and churches, -regardless of the rights of the Church and of the archbishop. Nicholas -was recalled to Rome when the interdict was finally removed, and -in November, 1214, John made a public proclamation that free and -undisturbed election to all the churches in his realm should be allowed -henceforth. This was an attempt on the king’s part to have the Church -on his side against the barons, for the battle was beginning between -John and the barons which was to be fought to a bitter end. - -John’s last campaign to recover the lost Angevine provinces for the -English crown ended in disaster, and he returned to England in 1214 -to face the full discontent of the barons whom he had harassed and -insulted from the day he came to the throne, and of a country suffering -from “the evil customs which the king’s father and brother had raised -up for the oppression of the Church and realm, together with the abuses -which the king himself had added thereto.” - -The national grievances were enormous and intolerable. The whole -administration of justice was corrupt, and no one could be sure how -the arbitrary decisions of the king’s officers would be carried out. -Liberty of the person was a farce when free men could be arrested, -evicted from their lands, exiled and outlawed without legal warrant -or a fair trial. “In a word, the entire system of government and -administration set up under the Norman kings, and developed under Henry -and Richard, had been converted by the ingenuity of John into a most -subtle and effective engine of royal extortion, oppression and tyranny -over all classes of the nation, from earl to villein.”[29] - -Here and there the barons had struck against some act of personal -injury, and the northern barons had been conspicuous in their -resentment, refusing to follow John as their liege lord in his -expeditions to France. But there was neither cohesion nor any sense -of national injury amongst the barons until Stephen Langton, with a -full sense of the responsibility laid on the successor of Lanfranc -and Anselm, of Theobald and Thomas, took the lead, and by strong, -courageous effort sought to end for all time in England such tyranny as -the country had endured under John’s rule. To Langton this was no mere -struggle between a despotic king and a set of turbulent nobles. It was -a struggle to win recognition of law for _all_ men, and to restore some -measure of justice and the enjoyment of fair liberty throughout the -land. The people had neither spokesman nor champion, and no man heeded -their wrongs save Langton. More than 150 years were to pass before -John Ball and Wat Tyler would appear at the head of a peasant army in -revolt. In the reign of John, yeomen, peasant and artizan were dumb. It -was Langton who saw that the barons fighting for their own rights could -be made to fight for all England. - -In November the barons came together at St. Edmundsbury, and in the -abbey church “they swore on the high altar that if the king sought to -evade their demand for the laws and liberties of the charter of King -Henry I., they would make war upon him and withdraw from fealty to him -till he should by a charter furnished with his seal confirm to them all -that they demanded. They also agreed that after Christmas they would -go all together to the king and ask him for a confirmation of these -liberties, and that meanwhile they would so provide themselves with -horses and arms that if the king should seek to break his oath, they -might, by seizing his castles, compel him to make satisfaction. And -when these things were done every man returned to his own home.” (Roger -of Wendover.) - -John kept Christmas at Worcester, but his court was very small, and he -realised that he stood alone. All through the years of the interdict -the pope’s ban had not kept the nobles from attendance on the king; it -was now when he stood reconciled to the Church that John found himself -deserted. He moved to London at the new year, and there on the Epiphany -came the confederate barons, making display of arms, and praying that -the laws and liberties of Edward the Confessor written in the charter -of Henry I. might be confirmed. John urged that the question was -too big and too difficult to be settled off hand, and asked that it -should be put off till Easter. This was agreed to on condition that -the king pledged himself by three sureties to fulfil his promises. -Archbishop Stephen, William the Marshall and the Bishop of Ely were -accepted as sureties, and in accepting the post Langton proved his -great statesmanship. There was no question of going over to the king’s -side. The barons knew the archbishop as their chief ally, but John knew -that Langton was to be trusted as implicitly as he trusted William -the Marshall. Langton’s one desire was to see the written enactment -granting constitutional liberties, and ending the worst of the royal -abuses. - -John did not waste the time allotted to him, but worked his hardest to -gain friends and supporters against the barons, and to break up the -confederacy. It was all to no purpose. His commissioners to the County -Courts--in the southern and midland shires, sent to explain the king’s -cause--met with no success. Nobles and churchmen alike stood aloof, -and all John could do was to write to the knights at Poitou to send -him mercenaries, and to appeal to his liege lord, the pope, against -his rebellious subjects. Finally, he took the cross, hoping for the -favours awarded to a crusader. These efforts were all of no avail. The -mercenaries were inadequate. The pope’s letters of rebuke to the barons -for their conspiracies and conjurations were unheeded, and at Easter, -John (whom the pope had warned to harken to “just petitions”) was -driven to send the primate and the Marshall for a definite statement of -the laws and liberties demanded. - -The barons, who were assembled at Brackley, presented “a certain -schedule,” probably compiled with Langton’s assistance, and this was -read to the king by the primate. “They might as well ask for my kingdom -at once,” was John’s reply to the various items, and he swore he -would never grant liberties that would mean his own enslavement. Both -Langton and the Marshall strove to persuade the king to yield, but to -no purpose; and all that remained was to return to the barons and to -state that the king refused their demands. Then the barons, on hearing -this, flew to arms, formally renounced their homage and fealty to the -king, and chose a military leader for themselves--Robert Fitz-Walter. -London welcomed the insurgents on May 24th, and John, with a handful -of mercenaries, had the whole baronage against him. Capitulation was -inevitable. From Windsor John sent envoys to the barons in London, -promising, for the sake of peace and for the welfare and honour of his -realm, to concede the laws and liberties demanded, and advising the -appointment of time and place for a meeting for “the settlement of all -these things.” The barons at once fixed the meeting for June 15th, in -a meadow called Runnymead, between Staines and Windsor, and there, in -the presence of well-nigh all the baronage of England, of Archbishop -Stephen, and seven bishops, and “a multitude of most illustrious -knights,” the Great Charter was signed. It was the work of Langton.[30] -It was he who had inspired the movement, had framed the articles, and -had brought the struggle to a successful issue. - -“One copy of the Great Charter still remains in the British Museum, -injured by age and fire, but with the royal seal still hanging from the -brown, shrivelled parchment. It is impossible to gaze without reverence -on the earliest monument of English freedom which we can see with our -own eyes and touch with our own hands, the Great Charter to which from -age to age patriots have looked back as the basis of English liberty.” -(J. R. Green.) - -Yet the Charter itself was in the main but the old charter of Henry I. -writ large. It set up no new rights and conferred no new privileges. -It sanctioned no constitutional changes, and proclaimed no new -liberties. Its real importance is in the fact that it was a _written_ -document--“this great table of laws, won by the people of England from -a tyrannous king, was the first great act which laid down in black and -white the main points of the constitution and the several rights and -duties of king and people.” (F. York Powell.) - -“The bonds of unwritten custom, which the older grants did little -more than recognize, had proved too weak to hold Angevins; and the -baronage now threw them aside for the restraints of written law. It is -in this way that the Great Charter marks the transition from the age -of traditional rights, preserved in the nation’s memory and officially -declared by the primate, to the age of written legislation, of -parliaments and statutes, which was soon to come.” (J. R. Green.) - -The first article of the Charter guaranteed the freedom of the English -Church, and, in especial, the freedom of elections, “which was reputed -most requisite.” - -By the Great Charter the feudal rights of the king over his vassals -were defined and settled, and the tenants of the barons were protected -in similar way from the lawless exactions of their lords. - -No scutage or aid was to be levied by the crown, “save by the common -council of the realm”--except the three customary feudal aids for -the ransoming of the king, the knighting of his eldest son, and the -marriage of his eldest daughter. This common council, consisting of -bishops, abbots, earls, and greater barons, was to be summoned by -special writ. The free rights of London and the other chartered towns -were fully admitted. - -The Court of Common Pleas (cases between subjects) was to sit at -Westminster (and not to follow the king in his wanderings), and judges -of assize were to go on circuit four times a year. - -No free man was to be seized, imprisoned, ousted of his land, outlawed, -banished, or in any way brought to ruin, save by the legal judgment of -his peers or by the law of the land. - -To no man was justice to be sold, denied, or postponed by the king. - -The free right of Englishmen and foreigners to pass in and out of the -country in time of peace was granted. - -The king’s mercenaries, “all the gang that came with horses and arms to -the hurt of the realm,” were to be sent out of England. - -Finally, by a supplementary document, the barons present at Runnymead -were to choose out of the whole baronage twenty-five sworn guardians of -the Charter, who, in the event of any violation of its articles, were -not to hesitate from making war on the king till the matter had been -put right. - -Well might John exclaim, in a wild burst of rage, when the Charter was -signed, and he was alone with his foreign troops, “They have given me -five-and-twenty over-kings!” - -The twenty-five were to ensure the king’s obedience to the Charter, -but who was to ensure the obedience of the twenty-five?--all of whom -were of the party of revolt against the king. A safeguard was obviously -necessary, and a second court of barons, thirty-eight in number, was -chosen--(which included William the Marshall)--and these first swore -obedience to the twenty-five, and then a second oath to enforce on king -and barons mutual respect.[31] - -The Great Charter was signed, and within a week it was published -throughout all England. But the “sort of peace” patched up between John -and the barons was not to last. None of the barons believed that the -king would abide by the oaths he had sworn, and they, for their part, -prepared for war.[32] - -To the Continent John looked for aid, “seeking to be revenged upon -his enemies by two swords, the sword of the spirit and the sword of -the flesh, so that if one failed he could count upon the other for -success.” He had appealed to the pope in May, and Innocent’s reply had -been a general condemnation of all disturbers of the peace. Pandulf, -the papal legate, was at Runnymead, and in August, when the barons -were openly making ready for hostilities, he and Peter des Roches, of -Winchester, called on Stephen Langton to enforce the papal sentence -of excommunication against certain of the barons. Langton, who was -about to set out to Rome for a general council, declined to do this -until he had seen the pope and discussed the whole question with -him. He believed the sentence had been drawn up by the pope under a -misunderstanding. Thereupon Pandulf and Peter des Roches, by virtue of -their authority, declared Stephen disobedient to the papal mandate, and -pronounced his suspension from his office of archbishop. - -Langton made no protest against the sentence but went to Rome, and -was present at the general council in November. His chiefest work for -England was done when the Charter was signed at Runnymead. With the -king and the barons at civil war, the country ravaged by John’s foreign -bands of merciless savages, and the barons praying Louis, the son of -Philip of France, to take the English crown, what could Archbishop -Stephen accomplish? Pope Innocent had declared the Charter annulled on -the ground that both king and barons had made the pope the over-lord -of England, and that in consequence nothing in the government and -constitution of the country could be altered without his knowledge and -sanction. But as the legate, the primate, and the bishops had all left -for Rome, the pope’s disallowing of the Charter never got published in -England at all, though it was known that he had sent letters. - -The sentence of suspension was removed from Langton in February, 1216. -A few months later the great pope, Innocent III., passed away, and in -October John was dead. - -In 1217 Stephen Langton was back again at Canterbury, to remain for -eleven more years the primate of England. With William the Marshall and -Hubert de Burgh, Stephen worked for the preservation of public peace -during those early years of Henry III. We find him in 1223 demanding -a fresh confirmation of the Charter in the council at Oxford, and two -years later its solemn proclamation is required by the archbishop -and the barons as the price of a new subsidy. Equally resolute is -Archbishop Stephen for public order, threatening with all the pains -and penalties of excommunication the barons, who (in spite of Hubert -de Burgh’s letters from the pope declaring Henry to be of age) were -anxious to keep the royal castles in their own hands. “At a time when -constitutional freedom was hardly known, when insurrection seemed the -only possible means of checking despotism, he (Langton) organized and -established a movement for freedom which by every act and word of his -life he showed to be in opposition to mere anarchy.” (C. E. Maurice.) - -Stephen Langton was never canonized, though application was made to -Rome to that end shortly after his death in 1228. His learning had made -him famous in Paris before Pope Innocent summoned him to Rome to become -cardinal priest of St. Chrysogonus. His wise statesmanship was proved -by the victory he won for England’s liberties over so energetic and -ruthless a despot as John, and with such material as the barons. His -strength of character and disinterested patriotism were impaired by no -taint of baseness or self seeking. If Stephen Langton is not numbered -with the saints, he ranks high in the great list of England’s primates, -serving religion as faithfully as he served justice and social order, -and his name is resplendent for all time in the charters of English -liberty. - - - - -Bishop Grosseteste, the Reformer - -1235–1253 - - -AUTHORITIES: _Letters of Robert Grosseteste_, edited by Luard; -_Monumenta Franciscana_; _Letters of Adam of March and Eccleston on the -coming of the Friars_, edited by Brewer; _Annales Monastici_--Burton -and Dunstable; Matthew Paris (Rolls’ Series); Samuel Pegge--_Life -of Robert Grosseteste_, 1793; F. S. Stevenson, M.P.--_Robert -Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln_; M. M. C. Calthrop--_Victoria County -History--Lincolnshire_; Gasquet--_Henry III. and the Church_. - - - - -BISHOP GROSSETESTE THE REFORMER - -1235–1253 - - -The story of Robert Grosseteste’s bishophood is the record of eighteen -years’ unflinching battle with abuses in Church and State. From his -enthronement as Bishop of Lincoln in 1235 till his death in 1253 -Grosseteste is conspicuous as a reformer. Now it is the slackness of -the clergy he is combatting, enforcing discipline on men and women -who, vowed to religion, preferred an easier way of life. At another -time he is maintaining the laws and liberties of the nation against -Henry III., who with all his piety knew neither honesty nor truth in -his sovereignty. Right on till the last year of his life Grosseteste -is as vigorous in resisting papal encroachments on the English Church -as he is in dealing with his clergy or with the king. As a reformer -his work is threefold:--(1) The correction of current abuses in the -Church. (2) Maintenance of justice under the misrule of Henry III. (3) -Resistance to the aggressive claims of the papacy. With all this work, -fighting enemies of England at home and abroad, Grosseteste is busy -administering his enormous diocese of Lincoln--then the largest in -the country, including as it did the counties of Lincoln, Leicester, -Buckingham, Huntingdon, Northampton, Oxford and Bedford (Oxford and -Peterborough were afterwards carved out of Lincoln)--and is found -writing to and advising all manner of men, kings, nobles and peasants. - -Here is the character of Bishop Grosseteste as his contemporary, -Matthew Paris, saw it, and Matthew was a monk, and the champion of the -monks, and hated Grosseteste’s stern interference with monastic life:-- - -“He was an open confuter of both pope and king, the corrector of monks, -the director of priests, the instructor of clerks, the support of -scholars, a preacher to the people, a persecutor of the incontinent, -the tireless student of the Scriptures, the hammer and despiser of the -Romans. At the table of bodily refreshment he was hospitable, eloquent, -courteous, pleasant and affable. At the spiritual table devout, tearful -and contrite. In his episcopal office he was sedulous, venerable and -indefatigable.” - -Six hundred years later the whirligig of time leaves this verdict -of old Matthew Paris unreversed, and finds Grosseteste’s reputation -enhanced. - -“There is scarcely a character in English history whose fame has been -more constant, both during and after his life, than Robert Grosseteste, -Bishop of Lincoln from 1235 to 1253. As we find his advice sought -universally during his lifetime, and his example spoken of as that -which almost all the other prelates of his day followed, so was it -also after his death. If threats from Rome and excommunications from -Canterbury fell harmlessly upon him while alive, his example nerved -others in subsequent years--as in the case of Sewal, Archbishop of -York--to bear even worse attacks without giving way. And probably no -one has had a greater influence upon English thought and English -literature for the two centuries which followed his time; few books -will be found that do not contain some quotations from Lincolniensis, -‘the great clerk, Grostest.’”[33] - -A Suffolk man was Grosseteste, and born of humble parents. Sent to -Oxford by his friends he becomes master of the schools and chancellor -of the university--the foremost scholar of his day--receives various -ecclesiastical preferments, and at the age of sixty is freely elected -by the chapter of Lincoln as their bishop. If the canons of Lincoln -believed that Grosseteste’s age would ensure comparative quiet for -the diocese and a continuance of the loose order of his immediate -predecessors, they were speedily undeceived. - -Grosseteste brought into Lincoln an energy for religion that disturbed -the easy-going monks, with their comfortable common-room life, and -altogether upset the secular clergy with their illegal marriages -and their parochial revellings. In the first year of his authority -Grosseteste’s letter to his archdeacons, followed by his diocesan -constitutions, shows the hand of the reformer. He calls attention to -the neglect of the canonical hours of prayer--certain clergy “fearing -not God nor regarding man, either do not say the canonical hours or -say them in mutilated fashion, and that without any sign of devotion, -or at an hour more suitable to their own desires than convenient to -their parishioners”--to the private marriages of many priests, to the -strife and bloodshed and desecration caused by the miracle plays in -churchyards, and to the drunkenness and gluttony attendant on funeral -feasts. Grosseteste also complains that the parochial clergy oppose -the preaching friars, “maliciously hindering the people from hearing -the sermons of the friars, and permitting those to preach who make -a trade of it, and who only preach such things as may draw money.” -Incidentally, and with a curiously modern touch, Grosseteste urges -his archdeacons to warn mothers and nurses against overlaying their -children at night, for it seems many infants were suffocated in this -way. - -Grosseteste relied on the friars, Franciscan and Dominican, to revive -religion in his diocese. From their first coming to England he had -befriended the little brothers of St. Francis and St. Dominic’s order -of preachers, and at Oxford had been conspicuously their rector. He -writes to Pope Gregory IX. in the highest praise of the Franciscans: -“Inestimable benefits have been wrought in my diocese by the friars. -They enlighten our whole land with the bright light of their preaching -and learning.” - -The secular clergy and the monks generally by no means shared -Grosseteste’s appreciation of the preachers of poverty, and when the -Bishop of Lincoln began to rout up the monasteries in his diocese -with visitations and enquiries the dismay was considerable. The -Benedictine monks in England were good, easy men in the thirteenth -century--Grosseteste finds no grave faults against morality to rebuke -in them--fond of their pleasant social life, and enjoying the comfort -of an existence that had few temporal cares beyond finding money for -pope and king. At the worst their sloth was culpable. Grosseteste -charged upon them with his preaching friars, calling for amendment and -the fulfilment of duties, attacking old abuses sanctioned by custom, -and showing no tolerant sympathy for the infirmities and shortcomings -of middle-aged clerks.[34] Respect him they must, for the learning -and high character of the bishop were conspicuous in the land, but -the dislike of all this strenuous exhortation was not concealed. The -very chapter of Lincoln, which had elected him bishop, refused to -admit Grosseteste as their visitor, or to acknowledge his jurisdiction -over their proceedings, and only after six years of controversy and -litigation was the case finally decided at Rome (1245) wholly in the -bishop’s favour. A sentence of excommunication pronounced upon him by -the monks at Canterbury during the vacancy of the see was of course -entirely ignored by Grosseteste. If the clergy resented Grosseteste’s -call to arms, it is to be remembered that they had suffered -considerably from the tyranny of the times, and had been reduced under -the general oppression to a feeble and sluggish timidity. The old “Song -of the Church”[35] tells how low they had fallen: - - Free and held in high esteem the clergy used to be, - None were better cherished: or loved more heartily. - Slaves are they now: despised, brought low, - Betrayed (as all deplore) - By those from whom: their help should come; - I can no more. - - King and pope alike in this: to one purpose hold. - How to make the clergy yield their silver and their gold. - Truth to say: the pope gives way, - Far too much to the king - Our tithes he grants: for the crown’s wants - To his liking. - -To check the rapacity of the king, and to stop the seizure of Church -revenues for Italian clerics, and thereby to raise the English clergy -from their state of sluggish despondency was Grosseteste’s work for -England. We find him conspicuous at the council summoned by the king -to meet at Westminster in 1244. In vain Henry III. appealed for -money, bishops and nobles reminded him that the money so frequently -granted had done no good either to the king or the country, and that -a justiciar and chancellor must be appointed for the strengthening of -the state. Henry demurred, tried postponements and delays, and these -failing, summoned the bishops alone, and confronted them with a letter -from Pope Innocent IV. exhorting them to give liberally to the king. -Even this failed to move the prelates. After much discussion, however, -some were for “a mild answer,” for many of the prelates “fearing the -king’s instability and the pusillanimity of the royal counsellors,” -were unwilling to deny the pope’s request. Grosseteste clinched the -matter by declaring they must all stand together with the barons:[36] -“We may not be divided from the common counsel. For it is written if we -be divided we shall all perish forthwith,” The next day Henry tried to -get at each of the bishops separately--an old device. “But they with -wary heed would not be so entrapped, and by departing early in the -morning escaped the net in which they had once been caught; and so the -council broke up to the king’s discontent.” (Matthew Paris.) - -Again in 1252 Henry summoned the bishops, and tried to coerce them into -giving him money by producing a papal mandate, authorising the payment -of a full tithe of all Church revenues to the king for the space of -three years. To make matters worse, “payment was not to be made on the -old assessment, but on a new assessment conducted with strict inquiry, -at the will and judgment of the royal agents and extortioners, who -would seek their own profit before the king’s.” The excuse was that the -king was about to start on a pilgrimage. Grosseteste was then an old -man, but he blazed out at this monstrous demand, especially when the -king’s messengers went on to explain that the tithe for two years might -be paid at once, and that the third year’s tithe could also be raised -before the king actually started. “By our Lady,” said the sturdy bishop -of Lincoln, “what does all this mean? You assume that we shall agree to -this damnable levy, and go on arguing from premises that have not been -admitted. God forbid that we should thus bend our knee to Baal.” - -The king’s half-brother, Ethelmar, bishop-elect of Winchester, -deprecated resistance to the will of pope and king, and urged that the -French had consented to pay a similar demand. “Yes,” said the Bishop -of Ely, “and it brought their king no good.” “For the very reason the -French have yielded must we resist,” replied Grosseteste. “To do a -thing twice makes it a custom, and if we pay too, we shall have no -peace. For my own part, I say plainly that I will not pay this evil -demand, lest the king himself as well as us should incur the heavy -wrath of God.” The other bishops followed Grosseteste’s lead, and the -old man went on to advise them to pray the king to think of his eternal -salvation, and to restrain his rash impulses. Henry naturally declined -to send an independent remonstrance to the pope against the mandate, -and the bishops decided they could do nothing in the way of granting -this special tithe. But they were hard put to it, “between the pulling -of the king and the pushing of the pope.” - -All Grosseteste’s dealings with the king show the same firm resolution -to stop the royal extortion, and to insist on the fulfilment of the -charters of liberties obtained from the crown. He carries on the work -of Stephen Langton, always backing up the unsuccessful efforts of the -good St. Edmund Rich (Archbishop of Canterbury, 1234–1240) to keep -Henry faithful to his word, and prepares the way for the great campaign -of his friend Simon of Montfort.[37] The very worst period of Henry’s -long reign is covered by Grosseteste’s episcopal life. Hubert de -Burgh’s wise rule was over by 1232, and Peter des Roches and the horde -of aliens were fleecing the country for the next twenty years. It is -not till after Grosseteste’s death that the barons dealt with Henry’s -misrule to any purpose. - -At the great council held in London in 1248, at which Grosseteste was -present, a full list of the national grievances is given: the lavish -waste of the wealth of the country on foreigners, the ruin of trade by -the arbitrary seizure of goods by the king and his agents, the robbery -of poor fishermen by royal authority, “so that they think it safer to -trust themselves to the stormy waves and seek a further shore,” and the -keeping bishoprics and abbacies vacant so that the crown may enjoy the -revenues therefrom, are the chief causes of complaint. They were not -new grievances, for the most part, and they were not to die with Henry -III., all charters and royal promises notwithstanding. - -Added to the common wrongs of Henry’s wretched misrule were the papal -extortions, directly encouraged by the king. In return for papal -mandates directing churchmen to supply the king with money, what could -Henry--himself the most devoted servant of the papacy--do but help -the pope to get what he could out of England? The wealth of England -was held to be of fabulous amount at Rome, and popes beset by fierce -ungodly emperors naturally turned to it in their need as to a treasury. - -But the thing was intolerable to Grosseteste. He had studied in Paris, -he welcomed Dominican and Franciscan friars from the continent as no -other prelate did, and had no objection to foreigners _per se_. But -the pope claimed the revenues of church livings for boys and presented -illiterates to benefices--to the obvious degradation of the Church in -England. Grosseteste was always willing enough to raise what money he -could for the holy see, but appoint unworthy and incompetent clerks to -livings in his diocese, that he would not do--not for any pope. - -The country groaned under the biting avarice of the Roman see, as it -bled under the vampire politics of Peter des Roches and his needy, -greedy crew of Bretons and Poitevins. - -What it all meant to England Matthew Paris has told us in his -description of things in 1237: - -“Now was simony practised without shame and usurers on various pleas -openly extorted money from the common people and lesser folk; charity -expired, the liberty of the Church withered away, religion was trampled -to the dust. Daily did illiterate persons of the lowest class, armed -with bulls from Rome, burst forth into threats; and, in spite of the -privileges handed down to us from good men of old, they feared not -to plunder the revenues consecrated by our holy forefathers for the -service of religion, the support of the poor, and the nourishment of -strangers, but thundering out their excommunications they quickly and -violently carried off what they demanded. And if those who were wronged -and robbed sought refuge by appealing or pleading their privileges, -they were at once suspended and excommunicated by a papal writ. Thus -mourning and lamentation were heard on all sides, and many exclaimed -with heart-rending sobs, ‘It were better to die than to behold the -sufferings of our country and its saints. Woe to England, once the -chief of provinces, the mistress of nations, the mirror of the Church, -the exemplar of religion, and now brought under tribute,--trampled on -by worthless men, and the prey of men of low degree.’” - -The arrival of Otho, in 1237, a papal legate (on the request of Henry), -far from remedying, increased the contemporary distress. For though -Otho was a discreet man, he was more eager to get money for Rome than -to deal with the oppression that plagued England, and when he did give -advice it was spurned by those who saw his grasping hands. Archbishop -Edmund was particularly vexed at having a papal legate set over him, -and what with one disappointment and another finally gave up in despair -the task of guiding the English Church, and in 1240 went to die at -Pontigny, where his predecessors Anselm and Thomas had lived in exile. - -Grosseteste stuck to his post, and the Franciscans and Dominicans, -whom he aided, poured in oil and wine on the wounds of the Church folk, -and revived religion in the country. - -Grosseteste fought the extortionate papal demands for Church revenues -all the time. In 1239, with his fellow bishops, he tells Otho plainly -that the Church is drained dry by the grasping importunity of Rome. -Otho left in 1241, and that same year saw Boniface of Savoy, a -handsome, soldierly man appointed to Canterbury as St. Edmund’s -successor. The following year came a new extortioner from Rome, named -Martin, an altogether inferior person to Otho, but with all the -legate’s powers of suspension and excommunication. His confiscations -and rapacity provoked a remonstrance to the pope even from Henry. -Martin at last, in 1245, had to fly for his life from England, and -when Grosseteste subsequently had a calculation made of the English -Church revenues enjoyed by foreigners, it was found that the incomes -of foreign clerks appointed by Pope Innocent IV. amounted to more than -70,000 marks--more than treble the king’s income. And all this was done -in spite of refusals by Grosseteste to appoint illiterates or allow -boys to hold benefices. - -The barons sided with the Church against Martin, and drew up a long -protest which they sent to the pope at the council of Lyons in 1245. In -this they complained:--That the pope, not content with Peter’s Pence, -which had been paid cheerfully from old times, wrung money from the -Church against the law of the realm, without the king’s permission; and -that the pope wrongfully put ignorant, covetous, or absentee Italians -into English livings notwithstanding his own promises, the rights of -patrons, and the privileges of the English clergy. A year later the -protest was repeated with another item objecting to the pope’s claim to -recall former charters. - -Innocent IV.’s answer to this was to threaten to dethrone Henry as -he had dethroned his brother-in-law, the Emperor Frederick. The king -weakly said no more, the barons, without a leader, were equally silent, -and the Church continued “to sate the greed of Rome.” - -But in Grosseteste there was no spirit of surrender. In 1253, the -very last year of his life, he was called upon by the pope to -provide a nephew of his with a canonry at Lincoln, and the bishop’s -letter of refusal is, perhaps, the only well remembered thing of all -Grosseteste’s writings. This letter was not, as commonly stated, sent -to the pope but to his representative who was also named Innocent.[38] -“The pope has power to build up,” wrote Grosseteste, “but not to pull -down. These appointments tend to destruction, not edification, being of -man’s device and not according to the words of the Apostles or the will -of Christ. By my very love and obedience to the Holy See I must refuse -obedience in things altogether opposed to the sanctity of the Apostolic -See and contrary to Catholic unity. As a son and a servant I decline to -obey, and this refusal must not be taken as rebellion, for it is done -in reverence to divine commands.” - -(This letter is quoted by Matthew Paris and in the _Burton Annals_. It -can be read in full in the _Epistles_, No. 128.) - -When the pope heard of this answer he talked angrily of “the old -madman” who dared to sit in judgment on him, and blustered about the -king of England being his vassal. The cardinals, however, said frankly -that Grosseteste had spoken the truth, and that he was far too good a -man to be condemned. “He is Catholic,” they declared, “and of deepest -holiness. More religious, and more saintly than we are, and of better -life. They say that among all the bishops there is no one his equal, -still less his superior. All the clergy of France and England know -this. Besides, he is considered a great philosopher, thoroughly learned -in Latin and Greek; and he is zealous for justice, and a man who deals -in theology, a preacher to the people, a lover of chastity, and a -persecutor of those who practise simony.” So they extolled him. And it -is to the everlasting credit of the cardinals of the Roman See in that -year 1253 that they could discern the sincerity and the great qualities -of the brave old bishop who defied the pope’s unrighteous commands. -There was no question at Rome of any disloyalty on Grosseteste’s part -to the Holy See, no suggestion of any failing as a good Catholic.[39] -And Pope Innocent IV. wisely let the matter drop, when the cardinals -assured him it would never do to interfere with Grosseteste. - -Before he died Grosseteste made a last appeal “to the nobles of -England, the citizens of London and the community of the whole realm” -on behalf of the Rights of the English Church, making a careful list of -the ills to be redressed. He also solemnly charged his friend Simon of -Montfort, never, as he valued his immortal soul, to forsake the cause -of the English people, but to stand up even to the death, if needs be, -for a true and just government, and with prophetic foresight spoke of -the heavier troubles coming on the land. - -On October 9th, 1253, the long life and the magnificent battling with -odds were over, and the great bishop passed away. He was buried in -Lincoln Cathedral, and in 1307, King Edward I. and the dean and chapter -of St. Paul’s made application for his canonization, but without -success. Fifty years later and Edward III.’s Statutes of Provisors, -1351, and Praemunire, 1353, by their prohibition of papal bulls and of -the appointment of papal nominees to English benefices, may be accepted -as the real acknowledgment of Grosseteste’s political work. - -“I confidently assert (wrote Matthew Paris) that his virtues pleased -God more than his failings displeased Him.” - - - - -Simon of Montfort and the English Parliament - -1258–1265 - - -AUTHORITIES: Matthew Paris; William of Rishanger; Thomas of Wykes; -Adam of Marsh--_Monumenta Frascescana_, _Burton Annals_, _Annales -Monastici_; Robert of Gloucester--_Royal letters of Henry III._ -(Rolls Series); _Political Songs_ (Camden Society, 1839); _Chronicle -of Melrose_; Stubbs--_Constitutional History_, vol. ii; and _Select -Charters_; W. H. Blaauw--_The Barons’ War_; Dr. Pauli--_Simon of -Montfort_ (translated by Una M. Goodwin); G. W. Prothero--_Simon of -Montfort_; Dr. Shirley in _Quarterly Review_, cxix. 57. - - - - -SIMON OF MONTFORT AND THE ENGLISH PARLIAMENT - -1258–1265 - - -“In the year of our Lord 1238, which was the twenty-second of his -reign, King Henry held his court in London at Westminster, and there -on the day after Epiphany, which was a Thursday, Simon de Montfort -solemnly espoused Eleanor, daughter of King John, sister of Henry III., -and widow of William Marshall, Earl of Pembroke. The king himself gave -away the bride to the said Simon, Earl of Leicester, who received her -gratefully by reason of his disinterested love for her, her own beauty, -the rich honours that were attached to her, and the distinguished and -royal descent of the lady, for she was the legitimate daughter of a -king and queen, and furthermore was sister of a king, of an empress -(the wife of Frederic II.), and of a queen (Joan, wife of Alexander II. -of Scotland). Our lord the pope, too, gave him a dispensation to marry -this noble lady.” - -Thus Matthew Paris, when Earl Simon, then a man about thirty-seven, -and “tall and handsome,” enjoyed the royal favour and stood godfather -to the infant Prince Edward. Simon had only done homage as Earl of -Leicester in 1232; his boyhood was passed in France, and his father was -the great soldier who led the French crusade against the Albigenses. -Earl Richard of Cornwall, Henry’s brother--soon to become King of the -Romans--objected to the marriage, regarding it as one more victory for -the foreigners whom Henry nourished at the expense of England. But -Simon was no real alien. His grandmother had been sister and heiress of -the Earl of Leicester, and Simon’s French training no more made him a -stranger in England than did Stephen Langton’s years of study in Paris -and Rome unfit him for the primacy of the English Church. - -Henry’s favour was short-lived. Earl Simon made friends with Earl -Richard and left for the crusades, disgusted with the king’s want of -honesty. So much wisdom did he show in Palestine, and so great was his -prowess, that Simon might have stayed in the east as regent for the -young King of Jerusalem. But he had work to do in England, and came -home with Richard in 1242. - -Here against all the disorder of misrule and the royal and papal -extortions Simon laboured with his friend Bishop Grosseteste, and he is -conspicuous at the Parliament of Westminster in 1244, and in drawing up -the great protest to the pope a year later. - -Then for five years (1248–53) Simon was in Gascony contending with -a body of nobles whom neither Henry II. nor Richard I. had been -able to make good subjects, and whose only object in making formal -acknowledgment of Henry III. was to escape the rule of Louis of France. -Henry gave Simon neither men nor money, and lent a willing ear to all -the complaints of Simon’s enemies in Gascony and in England.[40] At -his own expense the Earl of Leicester saved Gascony for the English -crown, and brought peace and law and trade to that province. Henry’s -return was to make Simon answer trumped-up charges of robbery, cruelty -and treason brought by Gascons in 1252. The charges were not proved, -although Henry sent his own commissioner to Gascony to make enquiry. -Earl Richard and other nobles who knew the country were convinced -of Simon’s justice, and Simon, who was in England trying to raise -supplies, turned sharply on the king, reminding him of unfulfilled -promises. “Keep thy agreement with me,” he went on, “or pay me the -money I have spent in thy service; for it is well known I have -impoverished my earldom beyond recovery for the honour of the king.” -“There is no shame in breaking my word to a traitor,” the king answered -angrily. At this Simon in open wrath declared the king a liar, only -saved by the shelter of royalty from the penalty of his speech. “Call -thyself a Christian?” said the earl. “Dost thou ever confess thy sins?” -“Yes,” said the king, “I do.” “Thy confession is useless without -repentance and atonement.” said the earl. The king, more angry than -ever, retorted, “I repent of one thing, and that is that I made thee an -earl in England, to wax fat and kick against me. Get thee to Gascony, -thou who lovest strife, and take thy fill there and meet thy father’s -fate.” “I go willingly, my lord,” came the answer. “And, ungrateful as -thou art, I will not return till I have made these rebels thy subjects -and thy enemies thy footstool.” - -Simon returned to Gascony, and though Henry again undermined his -authority, he kept his word, only giving up his command when the work -was done. - -Adam of Marsh, a Franciscan friar, the friend and correspondent of -Grosseteste, often writes to Simon in those days, encouraging and -advising him. “Better is patience in a man than force,” says Adam, -“and better he who rules his own passions than he who storms a city.” -He prays this strong upright soldier-statesman to find comfort in -the frequent reading of the Holy Scriptures, “breaking through as -far as you can the cares and distractions of storm and trouble,” -and recommends the 29th, 30th and 31st chapters of the book of Job, -“together with the delightful commentaries of St. Gregory.” - -Once more back in England, the time soon came when Simon was the -recognised leader of the barons in their struggle with the king. And -this leadership gave England its first representative parliament. - -Henry was in greater financial difficulties than ever in 1257. The -mad scheme of accepting the crown of Sicily for his second son Edmund -from the pope, on condition that the cost of driving out Manfred, the -Emperor Frederick’s son, undertaken by the pope, was to be paid for -by England, had been adopted by Henry in spite of the opposition of -bishops and nobles. Henry pledged his kingdom with the pope as security -for the expenditure in Sicily,[41] and at last in the parliament of -1257 had to confess his indebtedness. Fourteen thousand marks were -owing to Pope Alexander, and this wretched debt, in addition to the -general contempt for law and justice by the king’s judges, sheriffs and -foreign favourites, drove matters to a climax. The wet summer of 1257, -followed by a failure at harvest, brought famine in the winter. - -The barons insisted that the time had come for constitutional -amendment. “The king’s mistakes call for special treatment,” said -Richard, Earl of Gloucester, at a parliament early in 1258, and Simon, -closely related to the royal house as he was, agreed. The swarm of -royal parasites from Poitou raised objections to any interference -with Henry’s prerogative, but were swept aside. “If the king can’t do -without us in war he must listen to us in peace. And what sort of peace -is this when the king is led astray by bad counsellors and the land is -filled with foreign tyrants who grind down native-born Englishmen?” So -the barons argued.[42] - -To Henry’s threat, “I will send reapers and reap your fields for you,” -Hugh Bigod of Norfolk had retorted briskly, “And I will send you back -the heads of your reapers.” - -Parliament met again in June that year at Oxford--the “Mad Parliament” -it was called--and the barons came fully armed, for civil war seemed -imminent. But the barons led by Richard of Gloucester and Earl Simon -carried all before them and the war was postponed for five years. - -The work of this parliament, well known as the Provisions of Oxford, -was one more attempt to get the Great Charter honestly observed. Under -this constitution:-- - -The king was to have a standing council of fifteen, by whose advice he -was to act, and to whom the justiciar, chancellor and treasurer were to -be accountable. - -Parliament was to meet three times a year--February, June and -October. Four knights were to be chosen by the king’s lesser freehold -tenant-knights in each county. - -To save expense twelve commissioners were to be chosen to represent -the baronage--“and the commonalty shall hold as established that which -these twelve shall do.”[43] The fifteen counsellors consisted of six -of the king’s party, and nine of the barons’--the most conspicuous of -the latter were Simon of Montfort, Richard of Gloucester, and Bishop -Cantilupe, of Worcester. - -Then the oath was taken, “that neither for life nor death, for hatred -or love, or for any cause whatever, would they be bent or weakened in -their purpose to regain praiseworthy laws, and to cleanse the kingdom -from foreigners.” - -Henry and Prince Edward, his eldest son, took the oath willingly -enough--though the latter soon began “to draw back from it so far as he -could.” The king’s half-brothers and the rest of the aliens not only -refused the oath, but swore that as long as they had breath they would -never surrender their castles, revenues, or wardships.[44] Simon, who -on the ground of his foreign birth had at once yielded his castles -of Kenilworth and Odiham, without recompense, turned to William de -Valence--who was blustering more than the rest--and said sharply, “To a -certainty you shall either surrender your castles or lose your head.” -The barons made it plain that they were in agreement with this, and -then were the Poitevins afraid, not knowing what to do; “for if they -hid themselves in their castles they would be starved out; for all -the people would besiege them and utterly destroy their castles.” The -aliens fled to the continent, and the new constitution was proclaimed -in every county--in Latin, French, and English.[45] - -Twenty years had passed since Henry had blessed Simon’s marriage with -his sister Eleanor, and Simon had stood godfather to Prince Edward, -and now after the Parliament at Oxford, meeting the Earl of Leicester -in the Bishop of Durham’s palace on the Thames bank, the king cannot -conceal his fear of the one man who held up the good cause--“like -a pillar that cannot be moved.” The king had taken refuge from a -thunderstorm, and to Simon’s assurance that the storm was passing, -and was no longer to be feared, answered grimly, “I fear thunder and -lightning a good deal, Lord Simon, but by the Head of God, I fear you -more than all the thunder and lightning in the world.” - -“Everyone suspected that these astounding words broke from the king -because the Earl of Leicester manfully and boldly persevered in -carrying out the provisions, compelling the king and all the enemies of -these provisions to assent to them, and utterly banishing his brothers, -who were corrupting the whole kingdom.” (Matthew Paris.) - -Manfully as the great earl might strive, he could not accomplish the -carrying out of the Provisions of Oxford. Henry was quickly at his -old work, obtaining from Rome a dispensation from his old promises on -the ground they had been obtained by compulsion, and bringing back -his foreign supporters. The barons neither held together nor made any -serious effort to promote good government. - -Richard of Gloucester, jealous of Simon, fell away from the national -cause before his death in 1262.[46] - -Prince Edward stood by his oath, but did nothing to prevent the -break-up of the provisional government, and soon openly supported his -father. - -In spite of all this the Provisions, modified at Westminster in 1259, -endured for five years, and then it seemed as if nothing could save -the country from civil war. As a last resource appeal was made by both -sides to King Louis of France to arbitrate concerning the fulfilment of -the Provisions, and at Amiens, in January, 1264, the award was given. -Louis solemnly gave sentence for the king against the barons, entirely -annulling the Statutes and Provisions of Oxford, and in particular -declaring the king free to appoint his own ministers, councils, and -sheriffs, and to employ aliens. But by the award--the mise--of Amiens -the earlier charters given by the crown were to remain, and all -disputes arising out of the Parliament of Oxford were to be suppressed. -Louis gave as a reason for annulling the provisions that the pope had -already annulled them. - -The appellants had turned to Louis hoping for peace. The award was the -signal for war. Many of the bishops and barons at once withdrew from -Simon, who answered the deserters by declaring, “Though all should -forsake us, I and my four sons will fight to the death in the righteous -cause I have sworn to uphold, to the honour of the Church and the good -of the realm. Many lands have I travelled, heathen and Christian, but -nowhere have I seen such bad faith and falsehood as in England.” - -London was enthusiastic in its support of the barons, and the Cinque -Ports, the scholars of Oxford, and the Dominican and Franciscan friars -were all on the side of reform. Chief among Simon’s supporters were -Bishop Cantilupe, of Worcester, Gilbert, the young Earl of Gloucester, -Hugh le Despenser, the justiciar, and Roger Bigod. - -War began in March, when Prince Edward captured Gloucester, joined -Henry at Oxford, and then seized Nottingham and Northampton, while -Simon and the citizens of London attacked Rochester. Henry turned -south, and encamped in full force near Lewes. - -Again Simon laboured for peace, and in his own name and the name of -Gilbert of Gloucester, the Bishops of Worcester and London went as -ambassadors to Henry. Simon offered £30,000 to the king if he would -make peace and keep to the Provisions of Oxford, and assured him that -he had taken up arms not against Henry but against those who were “not -only our enemies, but yours, and those of the whole kingdom.” - -The king treated the proposal with scorn, and Prince Edward added an -additional message of contempt. - -On the 14th of May the battle of Lewes was fought and won by Simon, -“through a singular conjunction of skill and craft on the one side, and -rashness and panic on the other.”[47] - -The Earl of Leicester went into the battle fighting for his country and -his oath, and with the exhortation to his men “to pray God, if this our -undertaking be pleasing in His sight, to give us might to fulfil the -same, serving Him as good knights.” - -The stout old Bishop of Worcester blessed the troops, “who had among -them all but one faith, one will in all things, one love towards God -and their neighbour, so that they feared neither to offend the king -nor even to die for the sake of justice, rather than violate their -oaths.” (Matthew of Westminster.) - -At the end of the day the defeat of the royalists was complete, and the -king, Prince Edward and his kinsmen were prisoners. - -Then peace was made, Henry once more swearing to keep the charters -and articles of Oxford, to employ no aliens, to submit the Provisions -to arbitration again, to live thriftily till his debts were paid, -and to give his son Edward and his nephew Henry as hostages for good -behaviour till a permanent reform in the constitution was made. Early -in June these terms of peace were proclaimed in London, to the general -satisfaction, and on all sides the people shouted their thankfulness to -Simon. - - God’s blessing on Earl Simon, his sons and followers light! - Who put their lives in jeopardy and fought a desperate fight, - Because their hearts were moved to hear their English brethren groan - Beneath the hard taskmasters’ rods, making a grievous moan, - Like Israel under Pharaoh’s yoke, in thraldom and in dread, - Their freedom gone, their lives scarce spared, so evilly they sped. - But at the last the Lord looked down and saw His people’s pain, - And sent a second Mattathias to break their bonds in twain; - Who with his sons so full of zeal for the law and for the right, - Will never flinch a single inch before the tyrant’s might. - To Simon’s faith and faithfulness alone our peace we owe, - He raised the weak and hopeless and made the proud to bow, - He set the realm at one again and brought the mighty low.[48] - -And now in the summer of 1264 Earl Simon was to show what he could do -for England, for the victory of Lewes had placed power in his hands, -and he stood indisputably the foremost man in the realm. For one short -year his counsel was to guide the destinies of England and to make that -year memorable for all time by the creation of the first representative -Parliament. - -A new scheme of government was at once drawn up. Three electors chosen -by the barons were to appoint a council of nine for the guidance of -the king, and Simon of Montfort, Gilbert of Gloucester, and Stephen -Berksted, Bishop of Chichester, were speedily chosen as the three -electors. Hugh le Despenser remained justiciar, and Thomas Cantilupe, -the bishop’s nephew, became chancellor. (This Thomas subsequently -became Bishop of Hereford, died in Italy, and was canonized.) - -Then in December came the issue of writs for Simon of Montfort’s -famous Full Parliament of 1265. Two knights are to be returned -from each shire, and for the first time from each city and borough -the burgesses are to send two representatives. Hitherto Parliament -had consisted of barons and clergy, and knights sent by the king’s -tenants, and the representation of the townspeople was unknown. -Simon’s earlier policy at Oxford had done nothing to extend the basis -of government or create a national responsibility for the laws. “The -provisions of 1258 restricted, the constitutions of 1264 extended the -limits of parliament.... Either Simon’s views of a constitution had -rapidly developed, or the influence which had checked them in 1258 -were removed. Anyhow, he had had genius to interpret the mind of the -nation and to anticipate the line which was taken by later progress.” -(Stubbs.) - -This development of Simon’s views may fairly be traced to his close -and intimate connection with the Dominican friars.[49] Simon’s father, -the warrior of the Albigensian wars, had been the warm friend of St. -Dominic. Simon himself was equally the friend of Bishop Grosseteste, -the champion of the friars. As far back as 1245 Simon had founded a -Dominican priory at Leicester. In 1263 he had been present at a General -Chapter of the Dominican Order in Holborn, London, and the Parliament -of Oxford had met in a Dominican priory in that city. All along the -friars had supported the popular movement.[50] - -Now the peculiarity of the Dominican Order of Friars is its -representative form of government. Each priory sends two -representatives to its provincial chapter, and each province sends two -representatives to the general chapter of the order. - -Simon of Montfort, when the opportunity came to him for striking out -a reform in the English Parliament, adopted the plan which he had -studied and seen at work amongst the Preaching Friars. “The idea of -representative government had ripened in his hand,” and his genius -interpreted the mind of the nation. In spite of all the scorn that -has been poured on popular elections and the Houses of Parliament, -in spite of all the imperfections that necessarily are attached to -any constitutional system devised by the wit of man, the idea of -representative government has become the inspiration of the nations -of the world. The failings of democracy are obvious, the weak spots -in popular electoral systems glaring; but mankind, once grasping the -idea of freedom in politics, clamours eagerly for responsibility in -law-making and the administration of justice, and refuses to rest -satisfied under any despotism or bureaucracy, benevolent or malevolent. -Suppressed by dictators, perverted by demagogues, abused by the -unscrupulous in power, there still seems nothing better in politics -for mankind than self-government. “Better is he who rules his own -temper than he who storms a city,” wrote Friar Adam of Marsh to Simon -of Montfort. “Better self-government for a people than world-wide -conquest,” the average man declares, and the opinion slowly moulds -the destinies of nations, till “patriotism” becomes the word for good -service in politics. - -The verse of the thirteenth century chronicler:-- - - The king that tries without advice to seek his people’s will, - Must often fail, he cannot know the woes and wants they feel, - -gets re-expression in the nineteenth century in Abraham Lincoln’s: -“Government of the people, by the people, for the people.” Always -threatened by the personal ambition of man, often overthrown when -ambition held the sword of power, contemptible to the wise and prudent -because of the simplicity and innocence of “the people,” denounced as -dangerous by the professional expert in bureaucracy because of the -ignorance of “the people,” its inadequacy the common theme of the -disappointed--representative government survives its enemies, defies -its critics, and with its blemishes unconcealed, finds the company of -its lovers ever increasing and recruiting in its behalf. For since -that first Full Parliament of Earl Simon’s in 1265 it has never been -possible to get rid of the notion that representative government was -a key to the portals of freedom; and though the wider the freedom the -greater the responsibility, to the credit of the race at all times men -and women have pressed forward, not rejecting responsibility. - -Simon’s parliament sat from January to March. Its chief business was -the confirmation of the treaty of peace at Lewes, and Henry swore as -usual to maintain the new constitution, the charters and provisions. -The government was short-lived. Danger from France, where the queen -and Archbishop Boniface of Canterbury and all Henry’s alien courtiers -planned invasion with an army collected in Holland, had passed away -at the close of the previous summer. There had been a great muster of -troops for national defence near Dover, bad weather had incapacitated -the queen’s fleet, and Louis of France agreed to negotiations in place -of war. The Cinque Ports mariners refused a landing to the pope’s -legate, who was ready to excommunicate the new government, and flung -his papal bull in the sea.[51] - -Not from abroad but from within came the foes who overthrew Simon’s -government and murdered the great statesman. Earl Gilbert, of -Gloucester, like his father, grew jealous of Simon’s leadership, and -disputed his authority as to the ransom of some of the prisoners of -Lewes, and Simon’s sons added fuel to the flame by their pride and -overbearing insolence. Roger Mortimer and some of the nobles of the -Welsh marches rose for King Henry in the spring of 1265, and Gilbert -deserted the barons for the king.[52] William of Valence landed in -South Wales with a body of crossbowmen in May, and when Simon reached -Hereford to put down the rebellion, Prince Edward, who, with the king, -had been in Simon’s custody, made his escape to Mortimer and the -marches. - -Edward quickly raised troops, and joined Gilbert at Ludlow, where he -took an oath to obey the laws and charters of the realm. Simon, in some -danger of being cut off by this movement on his rear, sent word to his -second son--Simon--to go to Kenilworth and join him at Evesham, and -then turned back from Wales. - -The younger Simon was surprised at Kenilworth by a sudden raid by -Edward. His camp was broken up, his banners taken, and he was driven -back into the castle. Edward, fully aware that Earl Simon had only a -small force with him, hurried off to Evesham to attack him, before -young Simon could rally his scattered troops and come to his father’s -help. - -On the morning of August 4th Earl Simon halted at Evesham, and at -the king’s request, for Henry was still his captive, heard mass and -dined. His son’s army, now on its way, halted for the same purpose at -Alcester. “He was now only ten miles distant and the junction of father -and son seemed secure.”[53] But Prince Edward was already between them. -“As the morning broke his army lay across the road that led northward -from Evesham to Alcester. Ere three hours had passed the corpse of the -great earl lay mangled amid a ring of faithful knights, and the ‘murder -of Evesham, for battle none it was,’ was over.” - -At first Simon thought the advancing army was his son’s, for Edward -displayed the captured banners of Kenilworth, but when he saw the -standards of the prince and of Gloucester, and the well-known banner of -Mortimer, the truth was clear. - -“By the arm of St. James,” cried the earl, “they come on skilfully, for -they have turned my lessons against me. God have mercy on our souls, -for our bodies are theirs! Though if Simon were to come up we might -hope yet.” He turned to his eldest son, and pointing to the banner of -Gloucester said, “See, Henry, what your pride has done.” - -In vain Henry urged his father to fly while escape was possible. “I -had as lief die here in a good cause as in the Holy Land,” said the -earl, and the barons and knights standing round were equally resolute -to fight to the end--though they had but two men to every seven of -the enemy. The good Bishop of Worcester blessed the little army as he -had done at Lewes, and then the battle began. The Welsh footsoldiers -quickly lost heart and fled from Simon and the field, and the barons -were soon hemmed in. One by one they fell--Henry of Montfort, Hugh le -Despenser, the wise and upright justiciar, and Simon himself, wounded -and unhorsed, “fought on to the last like a giant for the liberties of -England.” A soldier stabbed him in the back under the mail he wore, and -then he was borne down and slain, overwhelmed by numbers rather than -conquered. “So a death full of honour ended the chivalry and prowess, -ennobled by so many deeds in so many lands.” “Thus lamentably fell -the flower of knighthood, leaving to others an example of steadfast -courage. Who can prevent the treachery of friends? Those who had eaten -his bread had raised their heels against him. Those who had spoken -words of love to him with their lips lied in their throats, for their -hearts were not right with him, and they betrayed him in his hour of -need.” (W. Rishanger.) - -For nearly three hours the unequal battle was fought, in the midst of -storm and darkness. So dark was it that King Henry, who had been forced -to remain with Simon’s knights, had difficulty in saving his life, and -was actually wounded by a javelin before he was recognized by Edward’s -soldiers. - -The monks of Evesham carried the bodies of some of the barons into the -abbey for burial, and after horrible mutilations by the victors the -remains of the great earl were reverently interred by the side of Hugh -le Despenser, before the high altar. - -“Those who knew Simon praise his piety, admire his learning, and extol -his prowess as a knight and skill as a general. They tell of his simple -fare and plain russet dress, bearing witness to his kindly speech and -firm friendship to all good men, describe his angry scorn for liars and -unjust men, and marvel at his zeal for truth and right, which was such -that neither pleasure nor threats nor promises could turn him aside -from keeping the oath he swore at Oxford; for he held up the good cause -‘like a pillar that cannot be moved, and like a second Josiah esteemed -righteousness the very healing of his soul.’ As a statesman he wished -to bind the king to rule according to law, and to make the king’s -ministers responsible to a full Parliament; and though he did not live -to see the success of his policy, he had pointed out the way by which -future statesmen might bring it about.” (F. York Powell.) - -The news of Simon’s death was received with general mourning as it -spread over the land. He was acclaimed by the people as a saint and -martyr, and miracles were said to be worked by his relics.[54] The -Franciscan friars drew up a service in his honour--“consisting of -lessons, responses, verses, hymns, and other matter appertaining to -the honour and respect due to a martyr.”[55] But the pope who had -excommunicated Simon was not likely to hear of canonization, and “as -long as Edward lives the service compiled in Simon’s honour cannot gain -acceptance to be chanted within the church of God, which was hoped -for.”[56] - -The “Lament of Earl Simon,”[57] compared the mighty statesman with -Thomas of Canterbury: - - For by his death Earl Simon hath - In sooth the victory won, - Like Canterbury’s martyr he - There to the death was done. - Thomas the good, that never would - Let holy church be tried; - Like him he fought, and flinching not, - The good earl like him died. - - _Refrain:_ - - Now low there lies the flower of price - That knew so much of war; - The Earl Montfort, whose luckless sort, - The land shall long deplore. - - Death did they face to keep in place - Both righteousness and peace; - Wherefore the saint from sin and taint - Shall give their souls release. - They faced the grave that they might save - The people of this land; - For so his will they did fulfill - As we do understand. - - _Refrain._ - - Sir Simon now, that knight so true, - With all his company, - Are gone above to joy and love - In life that cannot die; - But may our Lord that died on rood - And God send succour yet - To them that lie in misery, - Fast in hard prison set. - - _Refrain._ - -The good cause for which Simon had fought might well have seemed lost, -when Edward’s knights were hacking the dead body of the great earl to -pieces at Evesham. But it was not exactly a “Royalist victory,” for the -very men who stood victors over the mangled corpse of Earl Simon were -men as resolute as he was to enforce the Great Charter and its results -against the king.[58] - -In the hour of triumph Henry struck hard, and a mad reaction of terror -ensued. But the movement Simon had led could not be turned back, and -the very savage extravagance of the royalist party defeated its own -ends. A general sentence of disinheritance against all who had fought -with Simon drove the disinherited barons to keep up the fight. The -siege of Kenilworth, where Sir Henry of Hastings defied the whole -royal army, lasted from June to December, 1266, and was only ended by -Parliament insisting on the king appointing a board of twelve, who made -a just award concerning the disinherited. By this award, called the Ban -of Kenilworth:-- - -The royal obligation to keep the charters was required. - -The acts of Simon were annulled, and the full prerogatives of the crown -declared. - -The freedom of the Church was demanded. - -Justice was to be done according to the laws and customs of the realm. - -The adherents of Simon were to be punished by fine and not by -disinheritance, so that the king could repay those who had served him -faithfully without giving occasion for fresh war. - -Simon was not to be proclaimed a saint (seeing he died under the -excommunication of the Church), and those who spread idle tales of -miracles done at his tomb were to be punished. - -A complete indemnity was promised to all who accepted the ban within -forty days. - -For a time the ban was rejected, and it was not till the summer of 1267 -that the struggle was finally over. Peace was assured by the Parliament -of Marlborough in November, 1267, which re-enacted the Provisions of -Westminster (1259) as a statute. - -The lasting value of Simon’s work was seen in 1295, when Edward I. -summoned his great representative parliament on the professed principle -that “that which touches all shall be approved by all.” This assembly, -by that very principle, served as “a pattern for all future assemblies -of the nation.” (Stubbs.) - -Had Simon of Montfort received canonization by the Church he would -surely have been the patron saint of all workers in the world of -politics, and of all who honestly and courageously engage in public -work. - - - - -Wat Tyler and the Peasant Revolt - -1381 - - -AUTHORITIES: Walsingham; Knyghton--(Rolls Series); Wright’s _Political -Songs_--(Rolls Series); Froissart; Professor Oman--_Great Revolt of -1381_, containing translation of a chronicle of the rising in the -Stow MSS., first published in _English Historical Review_, 1895; -André Réville--_Le Soulèvement des Travailleurs_ (1898); Dr. G. -Kriehn--_American Review_, 1902; Edgar Powell--_Rising of 1381 in East -Anglia_; Dr. James Gairdner--_Lollardy and the Reformation_; G. M. -Trevelyan--_England in the Age of Wycliff_; J. Clayton--_Wat Tyler and -the Great Uprising_. - -[Illustration: KING RICHARD II. - -(_From the Panel Painting in the Sanctuary at Westminster Abbey._)] - - - - -WAT TYLER AND THE PEASANT REVOLT - -1381 - - -The Peasant Revolt of 1381, led by Wat Tyler, was not only the first -great national movement towards democracy, it was the first uprising -of the English people in opposition to all their hitherto recognised -rulers in Church and State, and it was the first outburst in this land -against social injustice.[59] - -The Black Death in 1349 and the pestilence that ravaged the country -in 1361 and 1369 upset the old feudal order. The land was in many -places utterly bereft of labour, and neither king nor parliament could -restore the former state of things. Landowners, driven by the scarcity -of labour, went in for sheep farming in place of agriculture, and were -compelled to offer an increase of wages in spite of the Statutes of -Labourers (1351–1353) which expressly forbade the same:-- - -“Every man or woman of whatsoever condition, free or bond, able in -body, and within the age of three-score years, and not having of his -own whereof he may live, nor land of his own about the tillage of which -he may occupy himself, and not serving any other, shall be bound to -serve the employer who shall require him to do so, and take only the -wages which were accustomed to be taken in the neighbourhood two years -before the pestilence.” - -This act remained the law until the fifth year of Elizabeth. - -“Free” labourers, landless men but not serfs, wandered away to the -towns or turned outlaws in the forests. Serfs--only a small number of -the population, for the Church had always recommended their liberation, -even while abbots and priors retained them on Church estates, and -Edward III. had encouraged granting freedom in return for payment in -money--escaped to those incorporated towns that promised freedom after -eighteen months’ residence. Villeins and lesser tenants commuted the -service due from them to their landlords by money payments, and so -began the leasehold system of land tenure. - -For thirty years preceding the Peasant Revolt the social changes had -bred discontent, and discontent rather than misery is always the parent -of revolt. - -An early statute of Richard II., framed for the perpetual bondage of -the serfs, heightened the discontent. - -“No bondman or bondwoman shall place their children at school, as has -been done, so as to advance their children in the world by their going -into the Church.” - -This same act made equal prohibition against apprenticeship in the town. - -The free labourer had his grievance against the Statute of Labourers. -Villeins and cottar tenants had no sure protection against being -compelled to give labour service to their lords; and they, with the -freehold yeomen and the town workmen and shopkeepers, hated the heavy -taxation, the oppressive market tolls and the general misgovernment. - -To unite all these forces of social discontent into one great army, -which should destroy the oppression and establish freedom and -brotherhood, was the work John Ball--an itinerant priest who came at -first from St. Mary’s at York, and then made Colchester the centre of -his journeyings--devoted himself to for twenty years. - -Ball preached a social revolution, and his gospel was that all men -were brothers, and that serfdom and lordship were incompatible with -brotherhood. In our times such teaching is common enough, but in the -fourteenth century, with its sumptuary laws and its feudal ranks, -only in religion was this principle accepted.[60] John Ball became -the moving spirit in the agitation set on foot by his teaching. He -had his colleagues and lieutenants, John Wraw in Suffolk and Jack -Straw in Essex--both priests like himself--William Grindcobbe in -Hertford and Geoffrey Litster in Norfolk. The peasants were organised -into clubs, and letters were sent by Ball far and wide to stir up -revolt. In Kent and the eastern counties lay the main strength of the -revolutionaries--it was in Kent that Ball was particularly active just -before the rising--but Sussex, Hampshire, Lincolnshire, Warwickshire, -Yorkshire and Somerset were all affected, so grave and so general was -the dissatisfaction, and so hopeful to the labouring people was the -message delivered by John Ball. - -Of course Ball did not escape censure and the penalty of law during his -missionary years. He was excommunicated and cast into prison by three -Archbishops of Canterbury, Islip, Simon Langham, and Simon Sudbury, for -teaching “errors, schisms, and scandals against the popes, archbishops, -bishops, and clergy,” and he was only released from prison, from -Archbishop Sudbury’s gaol at Maidstone, by the rough hands of the men -of Kent when the rising had begun. The “errors” of John Ball were -civil and social rather than theological. The notion that Ball and his -fellow socialists of the fourteenth century were mixed up with Wycliff -and the Lollards has really no foundation in fact.[61] Wycliff’s -unorthodox views on the sacraments and his attacks on the habits of -the clergy were of no interest to the social revolutionists, and John -of Gaunt, the steady friend of Wycliff, was hated above all other men -in the realm by the leaders of the revolt. Wycliff expressed as little -sympathy with the Peasant Revolt of his day as Luther later in Germany -did with the Peasant War, or Cranmer with the Norfolk rising under Ket -in 1549. - -John Ball’s sermons were all on one text--“In the beginning of the -world there were no bondmen, all men were created equal. Servitude of -man to man is contrary to God’s will.” He declared that “things will -never go well in England so long as goods are not kept in common, and -so long as there are villeins and gentlefolks.” He harped on the -social inequalities of his age, quoting freely from Langland’s _Piers -the Plowman_, and enlarging on the famous couplet: - - When Adam delved and Eve span, - Who was then the gentleman? - -As years went by and the time grew ripe for revolt, there is a definite -call to rise in Ball’s letters and speeches. “Let us go to the king, -and remonstrate with him,” he declares, “telling him we must have it -otherwise, or we ourselves shall find the remedy.” - -Richard II. was but eleven when he came to the throne in 1377. “He is -young. If we wait on him in a body, all those who come under the name -of serf or are held in bondage will follow us, in the hope of being -free. When the king shall see us we shall obtain a favourable answer, -or we must then ourselves seek to amend our condition.” - -Some of the rhymed letters Ball sent out, bidding his hearers “stand -together manfully in the truth,” urge preparation for the coming -conflict: - - John Ball greeteth you all, - And doth to understand he hath rung your bell. - Now with right and might, will and skill, - God speed every dell. - - John the miller asketh help to turn his mill right: - He hath ground small, small, - The King’s Son of Heaven will pay for it all, - Look thy mill go right, with its four sails dight. - - With right and with might, with skill and with will, - And let the post stand in steadfastness, - Let right help might, and skill go before will, - Then shall our mill go aright. - But if might go before right, and will go before skill, - This is our mill mis-a-dight. - - Beware ere ye be woe, - Know your friend from your foe, - Take enough and cry ‘Ho!’ - And do well and better and flee from sin, - And seek out peace and dwell therein, - So biddeth John Trueman and all his fellows. - -In other letters he greets John Nameless, John the Miller, and John -Carter, and bids them stand together in God’s name; and bids Piers -Plowman “go to his work and chastise well Hob the Robber (Sir Robert -Hales, the king’s treasurer); and take with you John Trueman and all -his fellows, and look that you choose one head and no more.” - -These letters and the preaching did their work; the peasants were -organised; men of marked courage and ability were found in various -counties; and “the one head and no more” was ready in Kent to lead the -army of revolt to the king when the signal should be given. Litster, -Grindcobbe, and Wraw were at their posts. In every county from Somerset -to York the peasants flocked together, “some armed with clubs, rusty -swords, axes, with old bows reddened by the smoke of the chimney -corner, and odd arrows with only one feather.” - -John Ball had rung his bell, and at Whitsuntide, at the end of May, -1381, came the great uprising, the “Hurling-Time of the Peasants.” The -fire was all ready to be kindled, and a poll-tax, badly ordered, set -the country ablaze. - -The poll-tax was first levied, in 1377, on all over fourteen years of -age. Two years later it was graduated, from 4d. on every man and woman -of the working class to £6 13s. 4d. on a duke or archbishop. Even this -with a further tax on wool was found insufficient. - -So early in 1381 John of Gaunt called the parliament together at -Northampton, and declared that £160,000 must be raised. Parliament -refused to find more than £100,000, and the clergy, owning at that -time one-third of the land, promised £60,000. Again a poll-tax was -demanded. This time everybody over fifteen was required to pay 1s., but -in districts where wealthy folks lived it was held sufficient that the -amount collected in every parish averaged 1s. per head; only the rich -were not to pay less than £1 per household, nor the poor less than 8d. -In parishes where all were needy the full shilling was demanded without -exception. It soon appeared that the money was not to be raised. In -many parts the returns as to the population liable to the tax were -not even filled in with any attempt at accuracy, and numbers avoided -liability by leaving their homes--to escape a tribute, which to the -struggling peasant meant ruin. Of the £100,000 required only £22,000 -was forthcoming. - -Then one John Legge undertook to supply the deficit, if he had the -authority of the crown to act as special commissioner to collect the -tax. The appointment was made, with the result that the methods of -the tax-collectors provoked revolt, and Legge lost his life over the -business. - -The rising began in Essex, when the villagers of Fobbing, Corringham, -and Stanford-le-Hope were summoned to meet the tax-commissioner at -Brentwood. Unable to pay, they fell upon the collectors and killed -them. The government met this assault by sending down Chief Justice -Belknap to punish the offenders. But as the judge merely had for escort -a certain number of legal functionaries, and as the blood of the -people was up, Belknap was received with open contempt, and, forced to -swear on the Bible that he would hold no other session in the place, -was glad to escape from the town without injury. And with this defiance -and overpowering of the king’s officers the signal was given, the -beacon of revolt well lighted. - -It was June 2nd, Whit Sunday, when the Chief Justice was driven out of -Brentwood; two days later Kent had risen at Gravesend and Dartford. - -At Gravesend Sir Simon Burley, the friend of Richard II., seized a -workman in the town, claiming him as a bondsman of his estate, and -clapped him in Rochester Castle, refusing to hear of release unless -£300 was paid. - -At the same time word went about that the tax-collector at Dartford was -insulting the women, and that, in especial, the wife and daughter of -one John Tyler had been abused with gross indecency. - -Whereupon this John Tyler, “being at work in the same town tyling of an -house, when he heard thereof, caught his lathing staff in his hand, and -ran reaking home; where, reasoning with the collector, who made him so -bold, the collector answered with stout words, and strake at the tyler; -whereupon the tyler, avoiding the blow, smote the collector with his -lathing staff, so that the brains flew out of his head. Wherethrough -great noise arose in the streets, and the poor people being glad, -everyone prepared to support the said John Tyler.”[62] - -Robert Cave, a master baker of Dartford, led the people straight off -to Rochester; and the castle having been stormed, and all its prisoners -released, Sir John Newton, the governor of the castle, was retained in -safe custody. - -And now the time had come for good generalship and discipline in -the ranks, if the fire of revolt was to burn aright. Accordingly at -Maidstone, on June 7th, Wat Tyler is chosen captain of the host; and -proof is quickly given that the rising is not for mob rule or general -anarchy, but to redress positive and intolerable wrongs. (Five Tylers -are mentioned in the records of the Peasant Revolt: Wat Tyler, of -Maidstone; John Tyler, of Dartford, who slays the tax-collector, and is -not heard of again; Walter Tyler, of Essex; and two Tylers of the City -of London--William, of Stone Street, and Simon, of Cripplegate.) - -In every respect was this Wat Tyler a man of remarkable gifts. Chosen -as leader by the voice of his neighbours in Kent, his authority is at -once obeyed without dispute, and his influence is seen to extend beyond -the borders of his own county. Jack Straw acts as his lieutenant; John -Wraw, of Suffolk, and William Grindcobbe, of St. Albans, come to him -for advice; and it is not till Tyler moves on London with his army that -the rising becomes national. He is plainly marked out as a great leader -of masses of men. Skilful, courageous, humane, Wat Tyler is proved to -be; firm, clear-headed, downright in manner, and yet large-hearted, -jovial and brotherly--equally at home with king or beggar. There is -nothing of the fanatical doctrinaire about this first great leader of -the English people. He could order the execution of “traitors,” but -he is not the man for bloodshed in England if the revolution he and -John Ball aimed at can be accomplished by peaceful means. After more -than 500 years the reputation of Wat Tyler stands out untarnished and -unshaken.[63] - -Yet for eight days--and eight days only--does history allow us to -follow the career of this remarkable man. On June 7th Wat Tyler was -chosen by the men of Kent to lead the revolt; on June 15th he was -dead. Of his antecedents we know nothing. Parentage, birth-place, age, -height, and personal appearance, are all unrecorded. His trade alone we -can infer, and we know that his contemporaries trusted him to the full: -for no suggestion has been made of any kind of rivalry or jealousy -amongst the leaders, or of criticism or grumbling amongst the rank and -file. - -Wat Tyler emerges from the obscurity of history to become a strong -democratic leader. For eight days he commands a vast army of men; -he confronts the king as an equal; orders the execution of the -chief ministers of the crown; and wrests from the king promises of -fundamental social importance. Then, in the very hour of victory, an -unexpected blow from an enemy strikes him down, and death follows. -Surely to few men is it awarded to achieve an immortal reputation in so -brief a public life. - -No sooner is Tyler acclaimed as leader at Maidstone than the commons -of Kent are flocking to the standard of revolt. The cry is for “King -Richard and the Commons,” and it goes hard with any who refuse to take -the oath. John of Gaunt is the enemy. John of Gaunt is held to be -responsible for all the mischief wrought on the coast towns of Kent by -the privateer fleets of the Scots and the French, for the raiding of -Rye and Winchelsea. (Only in the previous year these fleets had invaded -the Thames as far as Gravesend.) John of Gaunt is the head and front -of the misrule that bled the land with poll-taxes. John of Gaunt is -the incarnation of the landlord rule that would keep the labourer in -bondage for ever. So bitter is the feeling against John of Gaunt, and -so acute the fear that he is aiming at the crown, that a vow is taken -by the men of Kent that no man named “John” shall be King of England. - -John of Gaunt was the common enemy. But John of Gaunt was far away on -the Scottish border, and there were enemies near at hand to be dealt -with. The manor-houses of Kent were attacked; in a few cases, where -their owners were notoriously bad landlords, were burnt. The main -thing, however, was to obtain the rent-rolls, the lists of tenants and -serfs, and all the documents of the lawyers. These papers were seized -and destroyed by the peasants, for no assurance of freedom was possible -while such evidence of service could be produced. These documents were -the legal instruments of landlord rule; and as the people had risen to -end this rule, a beginning had to be made by destroying the machinery. -There was no general reign of terror in the country; there was nothing -of the ferocity of the Jacquerie in France; no slaughter of landlords; -and no common destruction of property. - -The nobility seemed to expect judgment at the hands of the people, -and those who were at Plymouth making preparation for their invasion -of France put to sea as quickly as possible when news came of the -rising.[64] But the people had risen not for blind vengeance or for -civil war, and the class who suffered badly at the rising were the -lawyers rather than the landlords. It was the lawyer’s hand that the -peasants saw and felt, and not the mailed fist, for the lawyer was not -only the land agent of the lord of the manor, he was also the judge in -matters of dispute between landlord and tenant, and it was he who kept -the lists of villeins and serfs, and in the service of his lord did not -scruple to manipulate those lists. - -In those first days of the rising, when yeomen and more than one -landholder joined the army of revolt,[65] and all who were willing to -cry “King Richard and the Commons” were counted as supporters, the -worst that the landlord suffered (except in extreme cases) was the loss -of his papers, but the lawyer who clung to his office was often hanged -without mercy, as a scourge to the commonwealth. - -Tyler was at Canterbury on Monday, June 10th, and here Archbishop -Sudbury’s palace was ransacked for papers, and his tenant-rolls burnt. -Beyond this, and a rough exhortation to the monks to prepare to elect a -new archbishop, no injury was done. The following day Tyler was back at -Maidstone, and his men burst open the archbishop’s prison and released -John Ball, with all others who had incurred ecclesiastical displeasure. -This accomplished, with John Ball, the people’s poor priest, in the -midst of them, 30,000 men of Kent--yeomen, craftsmen, villeins and -peasants--set out for London under Wat Tyler’s command. - -Blackheath was reached at nightfall on Wednesday, June 12th, and a camp -fixed; but a few indefatigable rebels hastened on to Southwark that -same night to burst open the Marshalsea and King’s Bench prisons. John -Wraw was at Blackheath, and after a short conference with Wat Tyler, -hastened back to Suffolk to announce that the hour of rising had struck. - -Near Eltham Tyler had overtaken the young king’s mother, the widow of -the Black Prince, returning from a pilgrimage, and had promised that -no harm should befall her or her women from his host. Reassured, the -princess and her company went on their way in safety to the Tower of -London, where Richard and his council were assembled, and told of the -great uprising. - -Judges had already been despatched into Kent at the first news of the -disorders, but had turned back before reaching Canterbury, not liking -the look of things. - -Early on Thursday morning, June 13th, the camp at Blackheath was astir. -It was Corpus Christi day and a solemn festival. After mass had been -said before all the people, John Ball preached on his old theme of -equality and brotherhood. “For if God had intended some to be serfs -and others lords He would have made a distinction between them at the -beginning.” He went on to speak of the work to be taken in hand at once. - -“Now is the opportunity given to Englishmen, if they do but choose to -take it, of casting off the yoke they have borne so long, of winning -the freedom they have always desired. Wherefore let us take good -courage and behave like the wise husbandman of scripture, who gathered -the wheat into his barn, but uprooted and burned the tares that had -half-choked the good grain. Now the tares of England are her oppressive -rulers, and the time of harvest has come. Ours it is to pluck up these -tares and make away with them all--the evil lords, the unjust judges, -the lawyers, every man indeed who is dangerous to the common good. Then -should we all have peace for the present and security for the future. -For when the great ones have been rooted up and cast away, all will -enjoy equal freedom, all will have common nobility, rank and power.” - -The sermon was received with bursts of cheers, and the people shouted -that John Ball should be archbishop, “for that the present archbishop -and chancellor, Simon Sudbury, was but a traitor.” - -Later that morning Sir John Newton arrived at the Tower with a message -from Tyler, asking for an audience with the king. All along it was the -belief of the commons that the king had but to hear the tale of their -wrongs and redress would be speedily obtained. - -“Hold no speech with the shoeless ruffians,” was the advice of Sir -Robert Hales, the treasurer. But Richard agreed to an interview, -and presently rowed down the Thames in the royal barge as far as -Rotherhithe with the Earl of Suffolk (President of the Council), and -the Earls of Salisbury and Warwick. - -The river bank was crowded with the commons of Kent, and Wat Tyler and -John Ball urged the king to land and listen to the message his subjects -brought. They were promptly rebuked by the Earl of Salisbury[66] for -their boldness: - -“Gentlemen, you are not properly dressed, nor are you in a fit -condition for the king to talk to you.” - -Instead of landing, Richard listened to the counsels of fear and pride, -and the royal barge was turned and rowed back swiftly to the Tower. - -Wat Tyler and the men of Kent, with thousands more from Surrey, at -once marched on to London Bridge, where they destroyed the houses of -ill-fame that clustered round the south side of the bridge. The prisons -had been pulled down the night before, and now the brothels were burnt -to the ground and their inmates dismissed--that the new City of God -of John Ball’s vision might be cleansed of its old foulness. These -places of infamy, rented by Flemish women, were the property of William -Walworth, the Mayor of London; and their destruction filled him with -rage against the invaders. - -Walworth made some attempt to fortify London Bridge by placing iron -chains across the bridge; and he gave orders for the drawbridge to be -pulled up, in order that a passage might be prevented. But on Tyler’s -threat that he would burn the bridge if a way was not quickly made for -him, Alderman Sibley (who, with Aldermen Horne and Tonge, supported -the claims of the revolutionaries on the City Corporation) had the -chains removed and the draw-bridge lowered, and Alderman Horne met -Tyler at the city gate and bade him welcome. - -Fifty thousand men followed Tyler in London, and the city was now at -the mercy of the peasant army. Walworth, who had no want of spirit, -declared to the king and his council in the Tower that 6,000 soldiers -could be raised in the city, but “fear had so fallen upon the soldiery -that they seemed half dead with fright.” Sir Robert Knolles with 600 -men-at-arms guarded the Tower. - -It was now that Wat Tyler’s great qualities of leadership and the good -discipline of his army were seen. With London in his hands, he warned -his followers that death would be the instant punishment for theft; -and proclaimed to the citizens, “We are indeed zealots for truth and -justice, but we are not thieves and robbers.” Every respect was to be -shown to the persons and property of the people of London, and wrath -was only to fall on John of Gaunt and the ministers of the crown, and -the lawyers--the enemies, as it seemed to Tyler, of the good estate of -England. In return, the citizens offered bread and ale freely to the -invaders, and London artisans joined their ranks in large numbers. - -The archbishop’s palace at Lambeth was soon stormed, and all the -records it contained were destroyed; the building itself was left -uninjured. - -At four o’clock in the afternoon the Savoy Palace of John of Gaunt, -by the Strand, was in flames; and all its wealth of treasure, rich -tapestries and costly furniture, rare vessels of gold and silver, -precious stones, and art work of priceless value, heaped up on a -bonfire or ground to powder. The Duke of Lancaster’s jewelled coat, -covered with gems, was set up as a target and riddled with arrows, -before it was cut into a thousand pieces and pounded to dust. One -wretched man was caught attempting to sneak off with a silver cup; -and being taken in the act, was put to death as Tyler had decreed. -The Savoy was burnt to the ground, but no one interfered with its -inhabitants; and Henry, Earl of Derby, John of Gaunt’s son (who was -to reign in Richard’s stead as Henry IV.), passed out with all his -servants unmolested. The wine-cellar proved fatal to certain of the -host, who, drinking freely, perished, buried under the fallen building. - -From the Savoy the army of destruction passed to the Temple, the -head-quarters of the Knights Hospitallers, of whom Sir Robert Hales was -president, and a hive of lawyers. The Temple was burnt, but no lives -were lost; for the lawyers, “even the most aged and infirm of them, -scrambled off with the agility of rats or evil spirits.” - -At nightfall the priory of the Hospitallers at Clerkenwell, the prisons -at the Fleet and at Newgate, and the Manor House at Highbury, had all -been demolished; and the men of Essex, led by Thomas Faringdon, a -London baker, were at Mile End; while William Grindcobbe, with a body -of men from St. Albans, lay at Highbury. - -In vain Walworth urged the king and his royal council to act. Richard -had sent to Tyler asking for a written statement of the grievances of -the commons, and had been told in reply that the king must meet his -commons face to face, and hear with his own ears their demands. In the -evening Walworth proposed that the garrison at the Tower should be -despatched against Tyler, “to fall upon these wretches who were in the -streets, and amounted to 60,000, while they were asleep and drunk. They -might be killed like flies,” Walworth added, “for not one in twenty had -arms.” - -But the handful of soldiers at the Tower were in mortal terror of the -peasant host, and “all had so lost heart that you would have thought -them more like dead men than living.” - -The Earl of Salisbury checked Walworth’s rash proposals. “If we begin -what we cannot carry through,” he observed, “we shall never be able to -repair matters. It will be all over with us and our heirs, and England -will be a desert.” - -An open conflict with Tyler and his 60,000 was a very hazardous -proceeding. Who could be sure of escape if it came to battle? So far -Tyler had only struck at the chief ministers and the lawyers, and why -should others risk their lives in such a quarrel? Besides, it was -said that Wat Tyler and a mad priest of Kent were for doing away with -all nobles, and for making all men equal, and caution was necessary -in dealing with men who held such strange opinions. England without -its nobility would be a desert, and at all costs such an irreparable -calamity as the loss of England’s nobility must be prevented. - -So Walworth got no help in his plans for resistance; and when that -night a messenger from Tyler warned the king that if he refused to meet -the commons of England in open conference, the people would seize the -Tower, Richard sent word in reply promising to meet his subjects on -the morrow at noon at Mile End, and there hear their complaints. - -Tyler accepted the king’s word, and after sleeping with his men hard -by the Tower, at St. Catherine’s Wharf, was at Mile End betimes. -Here he met Grindcobbe, and hearing that the people of Hertfordshire -had trouble with the abbot at St. Albans, bade Grindcobbe return and -accomplish freedom for the abbot’s tenants and serfs. - -Richard went to Mile End with no large retinue, and two of his -companions, the Earl of Kent and Sir John Holland, left him at -Whitechapel and galloped off in craven fear of the multitude that -thronged the road. Richard, though he was only fifteen, displayed -both courage and cunning when confronted with Tyler. He knew that the -discontent in the country was directed against the government, and not -against the king, and that the misrule could not fairly be laid to his -charge. Besides, he was the son of the Black Prince, and the people -showed no signs of hostility. His policy was to yield and to wait an -opportunity for regaining power. - -The conference at Mile End began with a request from Richard to know -what was required of him. Tyler answered that first all traitors should -be executed, and to this demand the king agreed. Then four definite -proposals were put forward by Wat Tyler: - -1. A free and general pardon to all concerned in the rising. - -2. The total abolition of all villeinage and serfdom. - -3. An end to all tolls and market dues,--“freedom to buy and sell in -all cities, burghs, mercantile towns, and other places within our -kingdom of England.” - -4. All customary tenants to be turned into lease-holders whose rent -should be fixed at 4d. an acre for ever. - -Richard at once assented to these requests, and to prevent any -uncertainty and remove all doubt or suspicion of good faith, thirty -clerks were set to work on the spot to draw up charters of manumission, -and to present banners to each county represented. - -Then Richard bade the people return home in peace, bearing the king’s -banner in token that the king had granted the request of his subjects. -One or two from each village remained to carry the charters of freedom -signed and sealed by royal warrant. - -Richard was taken at his word. Thousands of the peasants dispersed -that day believing their cause had triumphed. Nothing could be plainer -than the charters of manumission:--“Know that of our special grace -we have manumitted all our liege and singular subjects and others of -the county of Hertford, freed each and all of their old bondage, and -made them quit by these presents; pardon them all felonies, treasons, -transgressions, and extortions committed by any and all of them, and -assure them of our _summa pax_.” - -So ran the document which the peasants of Hertford bore, and similar -charters were given to the counties of Bedford, Essex, Kent, and Surrey. - -Richard was also taken at his word concerning the execution of -traitors, and by the authority of Wat Tyler, Archbishop Sudbury, the -chancellor, Sir Robert Hales, the treasurer, and John Legge, the -poll-tax commissioner, were dragged out of the Tower and beheaded on -Tower Hill. When Richard returned from Mile End the heads of these -three men were on the gate of London Bridge. - -Simon Sudbury, Archbishop of Canterbury, deserved a better fate, for -he was an amiable and gentle priest, and “lenient to heretics.” As -chancellor he shared the punishment of a government deservedly hated, -but there were many who deplored his death. - -The soldiers at the Tower offered no resistance, but joked and -fraternised with the people. - -(John of Gaunt’s chaplain, William Appleton, some of Legge’s -subordinates, and Richard Lyons also perished that day on Tower Hill. -Of these, Richard Lyons was a thoroughly corrupt person, who five -years earlier had been convicted of gross usury and of fraudulently -“forestalling” in the wool trade, and had escaped the penalty of the -law on being sentenced to pay a heavy fine and suffer imprisonment. At -one time he had been a member of Edward III.’s council, and in that -capacity had enriched himself and his friends at the expense of the -nation.) - -A cry was raised in London that night against the Flemings, and many -of these industrious aliens, whose only offence was the employment of -cheap labour, were put to death, denied even the right of sanctuary -when they fled to the altar of the church of the Austin Friars. The -houses of certain unpopular citizens were also fired, and it went hard -with all who refused to shout for “King Richard and the Commons.” - -But Tyler gave no sanction to the attack on the Flemings, and though -the London mob took the law into its own hands and dealt roughly -with those whom it disliked, there is no evidence of general rioting -and disorder. To the end the peasant folk in London remembered the -brotherhood John Ball had proclaimed, and respected their fellows, and -their good order is a lasting tribute to their leaders. - -Tyler, with the bulk of the men of Kent and Surrey, remained in the -city, and the king hearing of what had happened at the Tower, decided -to pass the night at the Wardrobe, by St. Paul’s, whither his mother -had gone when the Tower was invaded. - -Tyler, in spite of all that had been obtained at Mile End, was not -satisfied. The peasants and serfs had been freed by royal warrant, but -the landlords remained in possession of power, and there was no promise -of better government, no word as to the restoration of the old common -rights in the land, or the repeal of the savage forest laws. Reforms -had been won, but the changes were not strong enough to ensure a social -revolution. - -Once more, on the Saturday, June 15th, Richard was invited to meet his -subjects, and again he declared his willingness, summoning his commons -by proclamation to meet him that afternoon at Smithfield, in the square -outside St. Bartholomew’s Priory. - -It seemed on the morning of June 15th as though the rising had -succeeded triumphantly. The peasants had their charters of manumission, -the nobles were thoroughly alarmed and cowed, the soldiery powerless, -and Wat Tyler and his men still held the City of London. - -Holding such an advantage, Tyler determined to make the king decree -further reforms, and when the two met at Smithfield, the confidence of -victory could be seen in the peasant leader’s bearing. - -Richard, with two hundred retainers, and with Henry, Earl of Derby, the -Earls of Suffolk and Salisbury, Sir Simon Burley, and Walworth, the -mayor, were on the east side of the square, the great priory at their -back. - -Tyler and his army drew up on the west side, and when Walworth opened -the proceedings by calling on Wat Tyler to speak with the king, Tyler, -seated on a little horse, rode out into the middle of the square with a -single attendant. There he dismounted, dropped on one knee before the -king, and shook him heartily by the hand. He bade Richard be of good -cheer, and declared that within a fortnight he should have even more -thanks from the commons than he had won already. “You and I shall be -good comrades yet,” Tyler added. - -Richard, in some embarrassment, enquired why the commons did not return -home, and Tyler answered with a great and solemn oath that no one -should leave the city until they had got a further redressing of all -their grievances. “And much the worse will it be for the lords of this -realm if this charter be refused,” he concluded. - -Then Richard bade Tyler say what charter it was the commons demanded. - -“First, then,” said Tyler, “let no law but the law of Winchester -prevail throughout the land, and let no man be made an outlaw by -the decree of judges and lawyers.[67] Grant also that no lord shall -henceforth exercise lordship over the commons; and since we are -oppressed by so vast a horde of bishops and clerks, let there be but -one bishop in England; and let the property and goods of the holy -Church be divided fairly according to the needs of the people in each -parish, after in justice making suitable provision for the present -clergy and monks. Finally, let there be no more villeins in England, -but grant us all to be free and of one condition.” - -“All that you have asked for I promise readily,” Richard answered, “if -only it be consistent with the regality of my crown. And now let the -commons return home since their requests have been granted.” - -In the presence of his nobles and the hearing of his people the king -had promised that the demands of his subjects should be granted. - -For Wat Tyler the victory seemed complete, and now that the battle was -won he called out that he was thirsty, and complained of a parched -throat. The days had been strenuous, and Tyler longed for a draught of -the good home-brewed beer of his native county. His attendant brought -him water, and Tyler rinsed out his mouth with it, to the disgust of -the king’s courtiers. Then beer was brought in a mighty tankard, and -Tyler drank a deep draught to the health of “King Richard and the -Commons.” He remounted his little horse, while the nobles stood by in -silent and sullen anger, “for no lord or counsellor dared to open his -mouth and give an answer to the commons in such a situation.” Had they -not heard it proclaimed that henceforth all were to be free and equal -in the land? - -A “valet of Kent,” some knight in the royal service, broke silence, -muttering loudly his opinion that Wat Tyler was the greatest thief and -robber in all Kent. - -Tyler caught the abusive words, and immediately ordered his attendant -to cut down the man who had spoken in this insulting fashion. - -The “valet” edged back within the ranks of the king’s party, and Tyler -drew his dagger. Walworth, sharing to the full the rage of the nobles -at the capitulation of the king, and yet anxious to avoid a conflict, -shouted that he would arrest all those who drew weapons in the royal -presence. Tyler struck impatiently at Walworth, but the blow was -harmless, for the mayor had armour on beneath his jerkin. - -Before Tyler could defend himself the mayor retaliated. Drawing a short -cutlass he slashed at Tyler, wounding him in the neck so that he fell -from his horse. And with the fall of their leader fell all the promised -liberties of the peasants, and the rising collapsed. - -Two knights, Ralph Standish and another, plunged their swords into him -while he was on the ground. Still, mortally wounded though he was, -Tyler managed to scramble on to his little horse. He rode a yard or -two, gave a last call on the commons to avenge his death, and then -dropped to the ground to rise no more. - -Had the commons at once attacked the king’s party, they would have -conquered. But confusion fell upon the people, and there was no one -ready to take command. “Let us stand together,” “We will die with our -captain or avenge him,” “Shoot, lads, shoot,”--the various cries went -up, and the bowmen looked to their weapons. - -But Richard, with the presence of mind that marked his dealings with -the people at Mile End, turned the doubt and uncertainty to his own -advantage. He rode out boldly into the middle of the square, reminded -the people that he, and not Tyler, was their king, and bade them follow -him into the fields and receive their charters. - -There was no reason to refuse obedience, no reason to mistrust -the king. Tyler had always spoken well of Richard, and the people -themselves had seen him only yesterday sign their charters, and had -heard him in Tyler’s presence, only a few minutes ago, promise to do -the will of the commons. It was not by the king’s hand that their -leader had been slain. - -A small band carried Tyler’s body into the Priory of St. Bartholomew, -while the rest of the peasants followed Richard into the fields that -stretched from Clerkenwell to Islington. Here he held them until Sir -Robert Knolles arrived with 700 soldiers, for Walworth had lost no -time in spreading the news that Tyler was dead, and in raising a troop -for the king. By Richard’s orders the commons were dispersed when the -soldiery arrived, the men of Kent, now broken and dispirited, being -marched through the city, and left to take their way home. - -That very night Walworth and Standish were knighted for what they had -done, and in the morning Wat Tyler’s head stared horribly from London -Bridge. - -“My son, what sorrow I have suffered for thee this day,” cried the -king’s mother, when Richard came to the Wardrobe. - -“I know it well, madam,” answered the king; “but rejoice with me now, -and thank God that I have this day won back my heritage of England, so -nearly lost.” - -The great uprising was over. Wat Tyler had fallen, as it seemed, in the -very hour of victory. - -By Walworth’s orders, Jack Straw and two prominent men of Kent were -hanged on the night of June 15th, without the formality of trial. Jack -Straw, an itinerant priest sharing John Ball’s views, it is said, -explained before he died what had been in the minds of the leaders of -the revolt. They had meant to get rid of the supremacy of the landlords -altogether, and to substitute for the established clergy a voluntary -ministry of mendicant friars; the boy-king was to be enlisted in the -cause of the revolution before the monarchy was finally abolished; -and in place of parliament and royal council each county was to enjoy -self-government.[68] - -No longer in the presence of danger, the king and his ministers struck -fiercely at the rebels. - -On June 18th a general proclamation was issued ordering the arrest of -all malefactors and the dispersal of all unruly gatherings. On June -22nd, Chief Justice Sir Robert Tressilian went on assize, and “showed -mercy to none and made great havock.” John Ball was taken at Coventry -and, with Grindcobbe, hanged at St. Albans on July 15th. - -The Earl of Suffolk went down to Suffolk with 500 lances on June 23rd, -and John Wraw, with twenty others, including four beneficed clergy, was -quickly taken and hanged. Henry Despenser, Bishop of Norwich, grandson -of Edward III.’s minister, suppressed the rising in Norfolk, and walked -beside Litster to the gallows. - -At least a thousand peasant lives were sacrificed to the law under -Tressilian’s sentence. - -At Waltham a deputation came to Richard to ask if it were true that the -royal promises and charters were annulled, and the king’s answer left -no room for doubt, for it breathed all the hatred and contempt of the -commons that Tyler had striven to end: - -“O vile and odious by land and sea, you who are not worthy to live when -compared with the lords whom ye have attacked; you should be forthwith -punished with the vilest deaths were it not for the office ye bear. -Go back to your comrades and bear the king’s answer. You were and are -rustics, and shall remain in bondage, not that of old, but in one -infinitely worse. For as long as we live, and by God’s help rule over -this realm, we will attempt by all our faculties, powers, and means to -make you such an example of offence to the heirs of your servitude as -that they may have you before their eyes, and you may supply them with -a perpetual ground for cursing and fearing you.” - -In despair at this rough ending to all their cherished hopes of -freedom, the Essex peasants made a last attempt to fight for liberty, -and on June 28th, at Great Baddow and Billericay, more than 500 fell -before the king’s soldiery. - -On July 2nd all the charters of manumission and royal pardons were -declared formally annulled, and sheriffs were strictly forbidden to -release any prisoners. It was not till August 30th an amnesty was -granted to those suspected of taking part in the rising. In the autumn -parliament refused to ratify the charters, and the lawyers declared -that without the consent of parliament the charters were illegal. - -So there was an end to all Wat Tyler and the peasants had risen to -obtain, and well might it seem that the rising had been in vain.[69] - -Yet it was not altogether in vain that John Ball had rung his bell and -died for his faith, that Wat Tyler had led the peasant folk of Kent -to do battle for freedom. The poll-tax was stopped for one thing. And -villeinage was doomed. “The landlords gave up the practice of demanding -base services; they let their lands to leasehold tenants, and accepted -money payments in lieu of labour; they ceased to recall the emancipated -labourer into serfdom or to oppose his assertion of right in the courts -of the manor and the county.” (W. Stubbs.) - -The great uprising brought out the desire for personal liberty in -the labouring people of England that has never since been utterly -quenched. It was the first insistence that peasants and serfs were men -of England. “It taught the king’s officers and gentle folks that they -must treat the peasants like men if they wished them to behave quietly, -and it led most landlords to set free their bondsmen, and to take fixed -money payments instead of uncertain services from their customary -tenants, so that in a hundred years’ time there were very few bondsmen -left in England.” (F. York Powell.) - -If Wat Tyler died as a man should for the cause he loves, few of those -who trampled on the cause of the peasants were to know the paths of -peace in later years. - -Richard died in prison at the hands of Henry Bolingbroke, John of -Gaunt’s son, whom Tyler had let depart in safety when the Savoy was in -flames. The Earls of Suffolk and Warwick died exiled fugitives. The -Earl of Salisbury, fleeing from Henry V., was hanged in the streets of -Cirencester. Chief Justice Tressilian was hanged for a traitor in 1387, -and Sir Simon Burley was beheaded. - - This worldly wealth is nought perseverant - Nor ever abides it in stabilitie. - - - - -Jack Cade, the Captain of Kent - -1450 - - -AUTHORITIES: William of Worcester, Gregory, Mayor of London, 1451–2; -_Collections of a London Citizen_; _an English Chronicle_; _Three -Fifteenth Century Chronicles_ (Camden Society); Fabyan--_Ellis -Letters_ (second series), _Issue Rolls, Devon, Rolls of Parliament, -Paston Letters_, vol. i, with introduction by Dr. Gairdner; -Orridge--_Illustrations of Jack Cade’s Rebellion_; Durrant -Cooper--_John Cade’s Followers in Kent and Sussex_; J. Clayton--_True -Story of Jack Cade_; Dr. G. Kriehn--_The English Rising in 1450_, -Strasburg, 1892. - - - - -JACK CADE, THE CAPTAIN OF KENT - -1450 - - -The rising of the commons of Kent in 1450 under their captain, Jack -Cade, was the protest of people--sick of the misrule at home and of -the mismanagement of affairs abroad--driven to take up arms against an -incapable government that would not heed gentler measures. - -It was not such a peasant revolt as Wat Tyler had led, this rising of -the fifteenth century. It was largely the work of men of some local -importance, and country squires were active in enrolling men, employing -the parish constable for that purpose in a good many parishes.[70] - -For years discontent had been rife. Henry VI., a weak, religious -man, more fit for the cloister than the throne, had lost the great -statesmen of the early years of his reign. The Duke of Bedford, good -Duke Humphrey of Gloucester, and Cardinal Beaufort were all dead, and -Richard, Duke of York, by far the ablest man left among the nobles, -had been banished to the government of Ireland. The Duke of Suffolk -became the chief minister of the crown in 1445, and all the disasters -of the war in France and of corrupt maladministration in England were -laid at his door. Suffolk was responsible for the king’s marriage -with the penniless princess, Margaret of Anjou, who, ambitious and -self-willed, proved the worst possible counsellor for Henry. And the -price of this marriage was the territories of Anjou and Maine, which -were ceded to Margaret’s father, besides a heavy tax of one-fifteenth -of all incomes demanded by Suffolk in payment for his expenses in -arranging and carrying out the undesirable wedding. The years of -Suffolk’s ministry saw nothing but defeat and disgrace as the hundred -years’ war with France drew to its end. The victories of Edward III. -and Henry V., and all the wealth of life and treasure poured out so -lavishly by England, had come to nothing, and by 1451 all France save -Calais was lost. Popular discontent turned to action early in 1450 -against Suffolk and his fellow ministers. At the opening of parliament -Suffolk was impeached as a traitor, along with Lord Say-and-Sele, the -treasurer, and Ayscough, Bishop of Salisbury; and Suffolk, without even -demanding a trial by his peers, threw himself on the king’s mercy. -Henry was satisfied with the banishment of his fallen minister for five -years; but when Suffolk went on board, the sailors of the vessel that -was to take him across seas decreed a capital sentence, and after a -rough court-martial trial the Duke of Suffolk was beheaded on May 2nd -in a small boat off the coast of Dover, and his body left on the sands. -Four months earlier, Moleyns, Bishop of Chichester, who had only just -resigned the keepership of the Privy Seal, and was known as a supporter -of Suffolk’s, had been slain by the sailors of Portsmouth, when he -arrived at that town with arrears of pay long overdue to the troops. -Ayscough, Bishop of Salisbury, survived till the end of June, and then, -at the time when Cade was marching on London, he was dragged away from -the very altar of Erdington Church, in Wiltshire, when he had said -mass, and put to death on a hill there by the infuriated people of his -diocese.[71] - -Widespread as the discontent was in 1450, there was no general movement -throughout the land as in the days when John Ball and his companions -bound the peasants together by village clubs. Kent, “impatient in -wrongs, disdaining of too much oppression, and ever desirous of new -change and new fangleness,” was well organised for revolt, and the -men of Surrey and Sussex were ready to bear arms with Cade. Outside -these counties no one is found to have taken the lead against the -government. Kent and Sussex had their own reasons for revolt, for -piracy swept the English Channel unchecked, and the highways were -infested with robbers--soldiers broken in the war; and they had their -leader--Mortimer, whom some called “John Mendall” and others, later, -Jack Cade. So by the end of May a full list of grievances and necessary -reforms was drawn up, and the commons of Kent had, for the second time -in history, risen in arms and encamped on Blackheath, resolute to get -redress from the king for their injuries. - -The success of democratic revolt depends largely on the clear courage -of its leaders and the complete confidence of the people in those -they elect for their captains. In 1450 Jack Cade proved himself -both clear-headed and brave, and the men of Kent followed him -whole-heartedly. - -To this day we are still in the dark as to the real name and family of -the Captain of Kent. He was known popularly as “Mortimer,” and was so -described in the “pardon” he received. He was a man of some property, -or he would not have been attainted by special act of parliament, nor -have enjoyed the confidence of the men of substance who accepted his -generalship. He was known as an Irishman and as a soldier in the French -wars, and it is likely enough that he served under the Duke of York -both in France and Ireland. His strong advocacy of the claims of York -favours the notion of kinsmanship; but, on the other hand, York was by -far the ablest statesman of the day, and to demand his recall to the -king’s council was no guarantee of family motives. - -There was some talk at the time that Cade was called John Aylesmere, -and that he was married to the daughter of a Surrey squire at Taundede. -But there is no more evidence for these things than for the charges -made against him in the warrant for his arrest, that he had once killed -a woman in Sussex and had then fled to France and fought with the -French arms. - -The undisputed high character of Cade’s followers is all against the -portrait painted by the government after his death; when, anxious to -blacken the good name of so resolute a leader, it was made out that he -was merely a disreputable ruffian. The landowners of Kent and Sussex -would never have accepted for their captain a mere swashbuckling -blackguard. They rallied to him as a Mortimer, seeing in him a -likeness to Richard, Duke of York.[72] If his real name was Cade, then -he was probably a squire or yeoman, for Cade was no uncommon name round -Mayfield and Heathfield in Sussex, and Cades were landed proprietors -near Reigate as late as the seventeenth century. - -It was enough that, chosen Captain of Kent, Cade, or Mortimer, was -known and trusted as a brave, upright man of good character and -ability.[73] Whether descended from nobles or of good Sussex stock -was a small matter to men in earnest for the changes and reforms the -country needed. - -Ashford was the heart of the rising, and from Ashford the host marched -to Blackheath, where, at the beginning of June, the camp was fixed. The -army, estimated at 46,000, included 18 esquires, 74 county gentlemen, -and some five clerks in holy orders, who were presently joined by the -Abbot of Battle, the Prior of Lewes, and twenty-three county gentlemen -from Sussex. - -Cade at once explained that they must deal directly with the king if -they were to get relief from their present burdens, and then set to -work to draw up the bill of “the complaint and requests” of the commons -of Kent, while the rank and file laboured “to dyke and stake the camp -all about, as it had been in the land of war.” - -But war had not yet been declared, and for the present discipline was -loose in the camp at Blackheath.[74] “As good was Jack Robin as John at -the Noke, for all were as high as pig’s feet; until the time that they -should come and speak with such states and messengers as were sent unto -them. Then they put all their power into the man that was named captain -of all their host.” - -On June 7th the king was at Smithfield with 20,000 soldiers, and -messengers were promptly despatched to Blackheath to know the meaning -of the insurrection. Cade answered by showing the petition he had drawn -up, and mentioned that they had assembled “to redress and reform the -wrongs that were done in the realm, and to withstand the malice of them -that were destroyers of the common profit, and to correct and amend the -defaults of them that were the king’s chief counsellors.” He then sent -off the “bill of complaints” to the king and to the parliament then -sitting at Westminster, “and requested to have answer thereof again, -but answer he had none.” The “complaint” was received with contempt, -and the opinion of the king’s counsellors was that “such proud rebels -should rather be suppressed and tamed with violence and force than with -fair words or amicable answer.” - -Yet “the complaint,” which consisted of fifteen articles, was no -revolutionary document. It contained protests against the royal threat -to lay waste Kent in revenge for the death of the Duke of Suffolk; -the diversion of the royal revenue raised by heavy taxation to “other -men”; the banishment of the Duke of York “to make room for unworthy -ministers who would not do justice by law, but demanded bribes and -gifts”; the purveyance of goods for the royal household without -payment; the arrest and imprisonment on false charges of treason of -persons whose goods and lands were subsequently seized by the king’s -servants, who then “either compassed their deaths or kept them in -prison while they got possession of their property by royal grant”; -the interference with the old right of free election of knights of the -shire by “the great rulers of the country sending letters to enforce -their tenants and other people to choose other persons than the common -will is to elect”; the misconduct of the war in France, demanding -inquiry and the punishment by law of those found guilty. Complaint was -also made of various local grievances--the insecurity of property, -the arbitrary conduct of the lords of the seaports, the extortion in -taxation owing to sheriffs and under-sheriffs farming their offices, -the fines exacted by sheriffs for non-compliance with the orders of the -court of exchequer (whose writs were sealed with green wax) when no -summons or warning had been given, and the “sore expense” incurred by -there being only one Court of Sessions in the whole county. - -Five “requests” were added to the bill of complaints. These expressed -the desire of the commons that the king should reign “like a king -royal”; that “all the false progeny and affinity of the Duke of -Suffolk” should be banished from the king’s presence and brought to -trial, and the Duke of York and his friends included in the royal -council; that punishment should be meted out to those responsible for -the death of the Duke of Gloucester; that the extortions practised -daily by the king’s servants in the taking of goods from the people -should cease; that the old Statute of Labourers for keeping down -wages should be abolished; and that the “false traitors” and “great -extortioners,” Lord Say and Crowmer, the sheriff of Kent, should be -brought low. - -In brief, the charter of the commons of Kent demanded the total -expulsion of all Suffolk’s ministers and relatives from public service, -the return of the Duke of York and his party to power, the suppression -of the bribery, corruption, and extortion practised by the sheriffs and -government servants, and the repeal of the Statute of Labourers. - -It would have been well if Henry had heeded these complaints and -requests. As it was he pushed on to Blackheath, in spite of murmuring -in his army, and Cade, unwilling to risk a battle, and knowing that -disaffection was at work in London, quietly withdrew to Sevenoaks. -There was no spirit in the royal troops to suppress the rising, and -many favoured the Captain of Kent. But two knights, Sir Humfrey -Stafford and Sir William Stafford, kinsmen of the Duke of Buckingham -and the Archbishop of Canterbury, and men of some military repute, -decided to pursue the rebels and advanced to Sevenoaks with a small -picked body of soldiers. Their defeat was complete. Both knights were -slain, and those of their men who were not cut to pieces fled from the -battle, or joined Cade’s host. - -The result of this disaster to the royal plans was that Henry returned -to London with an army that soon melted away, or broke into open -disorder. Many of the nobles, who on receipt of the petition of the -commons of Kent had called for violent measures against the rebels, -now left the king, and, with their retainers, rode to their country -estates. Henry, to appease the clamour of some of his own followers, -ordered the arrest of Lord Say-and-Sele, the king’s treasurer, and of -Sheriff Crowmer, and bade officers take them to the Tower. Parliament -was dissolved, and Cade was busy in Kent gathering reinforcements, and -doing what he could to repair locally the mischief of Suffolk’s rule -before proceeding to London.[75] - -As a last resource, Henry decided to treat with Cade by ambassadors, -and on June 29th, when the commons were again encamped on Blackheath, -came the Duke of Buckingham, and Stafford, Archbishop of Canterbury, -for many years the king’s chancellor--a gentle old man, who, if he -had made no stand against the misgovernment himself, was hardly to be -blamed--to arrange, if possible, a peaceful settlement. - -The conference came to nothing, for neither Buckingham nor the -archbishop could promise Cade any positive redress of grievances, or -the interview he sought with the king. - -“These lords found him sober in talk, wise in reasoning, arrogant in -heart, and stiff in opinions; one who that by no means would dissolve -his army, except the king in person would come to him, and assent to -the things he would require” (Holinshed.) - -The failure of the mission was reported, and Henry, after appointing -Lord Scales as guardian of the prisoners in the Tower, hastily fled -to Kenilworth, although the lord mayor and citizens of London promised -to stand by him if he would remain in the city. There was little of -sovereignty in Henry VI., son of Henry V., the conqueror of Agincourt. -Quiet he loved, and in religious exercises he found the satisfaction -that others found in war and statecraft. - -On the first of July the way was open for the commons to enter London. -Suffolk, Bishop Moleyns, and Bishop Ayscough had all been summarily -executed. Lord Say, the treasurer, alone remained of the discredited -ministers. No opposition was offered to Cade by the citizens of London. -The Common Council had discussed the rising, and at the Guildhall only -one dissentient voice had been raised to the admission of the Captain -of Kent to the city. One Horne, a stockfishmonger and alderman, alone -objected to any recognition of the unlawful assembly of the commons, -and he was sent to Newgate prison for safety, and on Cade’s entry fined -500 marks for his daring speech. - -Negotiations had been opened between the City Council and the commons -while the latter were at Blackheath, and Thomas Cocke (or Cooke),[76] -a past warden of the Drapers’ Company, acted as the mutual friend of -both parties. From Cocke the corporation learnt of Cade’s purposes, and -that the city stood in no danger from the rising; and it was Cocke -who carried instructions from Cade to the wealthy foreign merchants, -requiring them to furnish horses, arms and money for his army. - -“Ye shall charge all Lombards and strangers, being merchants, Genoese, -Venetians, Florentines and others this day to draw them together: and -to ordain for us, the captain, twelve [sets of] harness complete, of -the best fashion, twenty-four brigandines, twelve battle-axes, twelve -glaves, six horses with saddle and bridle completely harnessed, and -1,000 marks of ready money.” - -So ran the summons, which was duly obeyed.[77] For Cade had added the -stern warning that “if this demand be not observed and done, we shall -have the heads of as many as we can get of them.” - -The corporation had really no choice but to welcome Cade. Kings and -nobles had fled, and here was the Captain of Kent with 50,000 men come -to do justice at their gates. London had suffered as badly as any place -from the misgovernment of the country, and it was plain the commons -of Kent were no army of maurauders, for no complaint had been heard -of their ill doing in Kent, and their captain had treated with full -civility the Duke of Buckingham and Archbishop Stafford. - -So the keys of the city were presented to Cade, and at five o’clock -on the 2nd of July the Captain of Kent, mounted on a good horse, rode -across London Bridge, followed by all his army. In Cannon Street, in -the presence of Sir John Chalton, the Lord Mayor, and a great multitude -of people, Cade laid down his sword on the old London Stone and -declared proudly, “Now is Mortimer lord of this city.” At nightfall -he returned to his headquarters, the White Hart, a famous inn in -Southwark, and next morning was betimes in the city. That day sentence -was passed on Lord Say-and-Sele and on his son-in-law, Sheriff Crowmer. -They were removed from the Tower by Cade’s orders, taken to the -Guildhall, tried and condemned for “divers treasons,” and for “certain -extortions,” and executed forthwith. Say was beheaded at the standard -in Cheapside, and Crowmer at Mile End, and so bitter was the public -feeling against these two men, and so fierce the popular hatred, that -their heads were carried on poles through the city, and made to kiss in -ghastly embrace before being placed on London Bridge. - -These, with a third man named John Bailey, who was hanged with Cade’s -permission for being a necromancer and a dabbler in magic and the black -arts, were the only persons put to death while Mortimer was lord of -the city. At Southwark, where the commons were now encamped, as at -Blackheath, theft in the popular army was treated as a capital offence, -and two or three “lawless men” were hanged. It was inevitable if -discipline and good order were to be obtained in so vast a company that -punishment should follow sharp and swift on all who brought discredit -on the rising. - -Lord Say and Sheriff Crowmer being dead, the city fathers saw no -further purpose in Cade’s lordship, and they dreaded being called upon -to contribute to the support of his army, for they knew that Cade -needed money for his men. To the everlasting credit of the commons no -charge was laid against them of riot or disorder. The city was in -their hands for three days, yet no harm befell the citizens. On their -captain alone has blame fallen for the events of those days in July. - -The difficulties of the man were immense. He had rendered no mean -service to the state by calling attention to the ills that plagued -the country, and proposing remedies. He had roused a large body of -Englishmen to demand a better government, and by the sharp method of -the times he had got rid of a bad minister and a corrupt sheriff, so -that public life was at least the healthier for the deliverance from -two of its oppressors. And now he had this army of 50,000 men, all -needing food and shelter--an orderly, well-disciplined body, no mob -of mercenaries--and the city of London, with all its wealth, gave him -nothing. - -Cade had to get supplies. The commons of Kent could not live on the -good will of the London people. Their captain was forced to levy toll -where he could. At present all he had received was the tribute from the -foreign merchants and 500 marks from the fishmonger Horne. - -On July 3rd, the night of Say’s execution, Cade supped with Philip -Malpas, Cocke’s father-in-law. Malpas was one of Suffolk’s party, a -King Henry’s man, unpopular in the city, and though an alderman and a -draper, an expelled member of the city council. Warned by Cocke, Malpas -got rid of his valuables before Cade arrived. But the Captain of Kent -found certain jewels belonging to the Duke of York in the house, and -these he carried off.[78] - -The following night Cade supped with a merchant named Curtis (Ghirstis -according to Fabyan, Girste according to Stow) in the parish of St. -Margaret Pattens and before he left insisted on a contribution to the -war chest. Curtis paid, but he resented bitterly the abuse of his -hospitality. It seemed to him, as it seemed to his fellow merchants to -whom he told the tale of his wrongs, sheer robbery, and the following -morning (Sunday, July 5th), while Cade rested quietly at the White Hart -in Southwark, the city fathers were busy shaking their heads over the -business, and grave anxiety filled their minds. This might be but the -beginning of pillage; there were always materials in London for a riot, -apart from Cade’s army. - -“And for this the hearts of the citizens fell from him, and every -thrifty man was afraid to be served in like wise, for there was many a -man in London that awaited and would fain have seen a common robbery” -(Stow.)[79] - -In the course of the day mayor and corporation were in consultation -with Lord Scales, the Governor of the Tower, with the result that -decision was made to prevent Cade and the commons from re-entering the -city. London Bridge was at once seized and fortified by the citizens, -and Matthew Gough, a distinguished soldier in the French wars, was -placed in command. - -Cade, knowing nothing of the hostility he had created, took his ease -that day--it was the last peaceful Sabbath he was to know. Towards -evening he gave orders for the King’s Bench and Marshalsea prisons to -be opened, and their inmates--for the most part victims of official -extortion and injustice--to be released. This was done, and certain -“lawless men” convicted of disobedience were haled off to be hanged; to -the end there was no relaxing of discipline. - -Then came word that the passage of London Bridge was stopped, and the -right of entry to the city barred against the commons as against a -foe. Cade took this as a declaration of war, of the civil war he had -done his best to prevent, and sallied out to force an entrance. At -nine o’clock the battle began on the bridge, and all through the short -summer night it raged, neither side effecting victory. “For some time -the Londoners were beat back to the stulpes at St. Magnus corner, and -suddenly again the rebels were repulsed and driven back to the stulpes -at Southwark.” It was not till nine o’clock on Monday morning that the -commons, wearied and disheartened, fell back from the fray, and Cade -understood that the attack had failed, and that for the first time -since the assembling of the people on Blackheath, at the end of May, -a check had been given to the democratic movement. A hasty truce was -settled between Cade and the mayor, that while the truce lasted the -commons should not cross into London nor the citizens into Southwark. -Cardinal Kemp, Archbishop of York, the king’s chancellor, who with old -Archbishop Stafford had been left undisturbed in the Tower since the -king’s ignominious flight, immediately decided that the time had come -to arrange a settlement with the Captain of Kent. - -Kemp sent messengers that day to the White Hart, asking Cade to meet -the representatives of the king, “to the end that the civil commotions -and disturbances might cease and tranquility be restored,” and Cade -consented. - -Kemp, who had himself presided at the trial and condemnation of -Suffolk, brought to the conference, which was held in the church of St. -Margaret, Southwark,[80] on July 7th, Archbishop Stafford and William -Waynfleet, Bishop of Winchester. The chancellor, bent on making peace, -also brought pardons to all concerned, duly signed and sealed. He -listened courteously to Cade’s “complaints” and “requests,” received -the petition, promised it should have the full consideration of -parliament, and then announced a full pardon to all who should return -home. - -The proposals of the bishops won the general approval of the commons. -There was nothing to be gained, it seemed, by remaining in arms, now -they had won a promise that their charter should come before parliament. - -Cade alone hesitated. What if parliament should disavow these -“pardons,” and the commons be treated as the peasants were treated when -they trusted a king’s word? He asked for the endorsement of his own -pardon, and the pardons of his followers, by parliament before his army -dispersed. Chancellor Kemp explained that this was impossible, because -parliament was dissolved. The people were satisfied with the cardinal’s -word. The rising was at an end. - -The following day the bulk of the commons departed from Southwark for -their farms and cottages in Kent and Surrey and Sussex. Cade watched -them go. His own mind was made up. Not till parliament should give him -a pardon of indisputable legality would he lay down his arms. With a -small band of followers he set off for Rochester, sending what goods -and provisions he had by water. - -The rising was at an end, and nothing more was heard in parliament, or -elsewhere, of the famous charter of “complaints” and “requests.” - -With the break-up of the insurgent army, the government woke to -activity. Alexander Iden was appointed sheriff of Kent, and marrying -Crowmer’s widow, subsequently gained considerable profit. Within a week -the king’s writ and proclamation, declaring John Cade a false traitor, -was posted throughout the countryside, and Cade, defeated in an attempt -to get possession of Queenborough Castle, was a fugitive with the -reward of 1,000 marks on his head, alive or dead, and with Sheriff Iden -in hot pursuit. - -Near Heathfield, in Sussex, Iden came up with his prey, early on -Monday, July 13th. - -Cade died fighting. A broken man, worn and famished, friendless and -alone, he still had his sword. The spirit of Mortimer, Captain of -Kent, flickered up in the presence of his enemies--it were better to -die sword in hand fighting for freedom than to perish basely by the -hangman. So Cade fought his last fight in the Sussex garden, and fell -mortally wounded, overpowered by the sheriff and his men. - -In all haste Iden sent off the dead body to London; it was identified -by the hostess of the White Hart, and three days later the head was -stuck on London Bridge. The body was quartered and portions sent to -Blackheath, Norwich, Salisbury, and Gloucester, for public exposure. -The sheriffs of London, upon whom the gruesome task fell of despatching -these remains, complained bitterly of the cost of this proceeding, -“because that hardly any persons durst nor would take upon them the -carriage for doubt of their lives.”[81] - -Iden got his 1,000 marks reward, besides getting the governorship of -Rochester Castle, at a salary of £36 per annum. - -Cade was “attainted of treason” by act of parliament, and all his -goods, lands, and tenements made forfeit to the crown. A year later -another act of parliament made void all that had been done by Cade’s -authority during the rising. - -In January, 1451, Henry VI. went into Kent with his justices, and this -royal visitation was known as the harvest of heads; for in spite of -Cardinal Kemp’s pardons, twenty-six men of Canterbury and Rochester -implicated in the rising were hanged. - -So the last echoes of the rising died away, and corruption and -misgovernment remained. But the commons of Kent and their captain had -done what they could, and in the only way that seemed possible, to get -justice done, and their failure was without dishonour. - - - - -Sir Thomas More and the Freedom of Conscience - -1529–1535 - - -AUTHORITIES: William Roper--_Life of Sir Thomas More_, 1626; -Harpsfield--_Life of More_ (Harleian MSS.); Stapleton--_Ires Thomæ_, -1588; Cresacre More--_Life of More_, 1627; Erasmus--_Epistolae_ -(Leyden, 1706); Sir James Mackintosh--_Life of More_, 1844; -Campbell--_Lives of the Chancellors_; Foss--_Lives of the Judges_; -_Calendar of State Papers--Henry VIII._, edited by Dr. Brewer and Dr. -Gairdner (Rolls Series); _More’s English Works_, edited by William -Rastell; Rev. T. E. Bridgett--_Life of Blessed John Fisher_, and _Life -and Writings of Sir Thomas More_, 1891. - -[Illustration: SIR THOMAS MORE - -(_From the Drawing by Hans Holbein._)] - - - - -SIR THOMAS MORE AND THE FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE - -1529–1535. - - -“Did Nature ever frame a sweeter, happier character than that of -More?”--so Erasmus wrote in 1498, when Thomas More was twenty, and -Erasmus, recently come to England, some ten years older. It was at the -beginning of their friendship, a friendship that was to last unbroken -till death,[82] and More had then passed from the household of Cardinal -Morton to Oxford, and from Oxford to Lincoln’s Inn, to take up his -father’s calling and follow the law as a barrister. - -Twenty years later Erasmus, writing at length to Ulrich von Hutten, -gives us a portrait of More in full manhood. Temperance, simplicity, -human affection, good humour, independence of mind--these qualities are -conspicuous. - -“I never saw anyone so indifferent about food. Until he was a young -man he delighted in drinking water, but that was natural to him. Yet, -that he might not seem to be singular or unsociable, he would conceal -his temperance from his guests by drinking the lightest beer, or often -pure water, out of a pewter vessel.” - -“He prefers milk diet and fruits, and is especially fond of eggs. He -would rather eat corned beef and coarse bread than what are called -delicacies.” - -“He likes a simple dress, using neither silk nor purple nor chains of -gold--except on state occasions. It is wonderful how careless he is of -all that ceremony which most men identify with politeness. He neither -requires it from others nor is anxious to use it himself, though when -it is necessary, at interviews or banquets, he knows how to employ it. -But he thinks it unmanly to waste time over such trifles.” - -“He seems born and fashioned for friendship, and is a most faithful and -enduring friend. He is easy of access to all; but if he chances to get -familiar with one whose vices will not brook correction, rather than -a sudden breaking off, he gradually relaxes the intimacy and quietly -drops it. He abhors games of tennis, dice, cards, and the like, by -which most gentlemen kill time. Though he is rather too negligent of -his own interests, no one is more diligent in behalf of his friends. -So polite, and so sweet-mannered is he in company, that no one is -too melancholy to be cheered by him. Since boyhood he has always so -delighted in merriment that it seems to be part of his nature; yet his -merriment is never turned into buffoonery.” - -“No one is less led by the opinions of the crowd, yet no one is less -eccentric.” - -The friendship of More and Erasmus had ripened in those twenty -years. In More’s house, and at his instigation, Erasmus had written -the _Praise of Folly_,[83] and the great scholar watched with warm -interest the famous career and the brilliant character of the man he -loved so heartily. - -More was already high in Henry VIII.’s favour when Erasmus could write -that no one was less led by the opinions of the crowd, and more than -once his independence and courage of mind had been proved in the twenty -years that had passed. - -Drawn at first to the monastic life, More had spent four years -(1500–1504) with the Carthusians in Smithfield, “frequenting daily -their spiritual exercises, but without any vow.” Then it is plain to -him that his vocation is not the priesthood, but marriage and public -life, and he leaves the Charterhouse, and in 1505 is married and in -Parliament.[84] But all his life the devotion to religion, and to -the services of the Church, remain in More, and he is ascetic in the -mortifications of the body till the spirit and the will ride supreme. - -In the House of Commons More stood out against the exactions of Henry -VII., and at once fell under the king’s displeasure. - -More’s son-in-law, Roper, tells the story: - -“In the time of King Henry the Seventh, More was made a burgess of the -Parliament wherein was demanded by the king (as I have heard reported) -about three-fifteenths, for the marriage of his eldest daughter, -that then should be Scottish Queen; at the last debating whereof he -made such arguments and reasons against, that the king’s demands were -thereby overthrown. So that one of the king’s privy chamber being -present thereat, brought word to the king out of the Parliament house -that a beardless boy had disappointed all his purpose. Whereupon the -king, conceiving great indignation towards him, could not be satisfied -until he had some way revenged it. And forasmuch as he, nothing have, -nothing could lose, his Grace devised a causeless quarrel against his -father, keeping him in the Tower till he had made him pay a hundred -pounds fine.... Had not the king soon after died, Sir Thomas More was -determined to have gone over sea, thinking that being in the king’s -indignation, he could not live in England without great danger.” - -The grant from parliament to the king was reduced from £113,000 to -£30,000 by More’s action; and if this action brought royal anger, it -won for More the confidence of his fellow-citizens in London, so that -we see him in the second year of Henry VIII. under-sheriff for the -city, and according to Erasmus and Roper, the most popular lawyer of -the day. With all his legal business, and good income, More is never -anxious after money. “While he was still dependent on his fees, he gave -to all true and friendly counsel, considering their interests rather -than his own; he persuaded many to settle with their opponents as the -cheaper course. If he could not induce them to act in that manner--for -some men delight in litigation--he would still indicate the method that -was least expensive.”[85] - -More’s rising reputation was bound to attract the notice of Henry -VIII., for the king was alert in the early years of his reign to -get good men at the court, and Wolsey, who had become chancellor on -Archbishop Warham’s retirement in 1515, was anxious to enlist More in -the royal service. The court had no attractions for More, his embassies -to Flanders and Calais, to settle trade disputes and difficulties -with France, wearied him, and in 1516 he was engaged in finishing -his _Utopia_. According to Roper, it was More’s independence of mind -that made the king force office at court upon him. A ship belonging -to the pope, which had put into Southampton, was claimed by Henry as -a forfeiture. More argued the case so clearly that the commissioners -decided in the pope’s favour, and the king at once declared he must -have More in his service. - -Then for the next twelve years Sir Thomas More enjoyed the royal -favour and friendship. His promotion was rapid. Secretary of state, -master of requests when the king was travelling, privy councilor, -under-treasurer, or chancellor of the exchequer--all these offices were -filled. In 1521 More was knighted, in 1523 he was speaker of the House -of Commons, and in 1525 chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. - -Erasmus writes to Ulrich von Hutten in 1519 in praise of More’s public -work: “In serious matters no man’s advice is more prized, and when the -king wishes for recreation no man’s conversation is more entertaining. -Often there are matters deep and involved that demand a grave and -prudent judge, and More unravels these questions in a way that gives -satisfaction to both sides. Yet no one has ever prevailed on him to -receive a gift for his decision. Happy that commonwealth where kings -appoint such officials! No pride has come to him with his high estate. -With all the weight of state affairs he remembers his old friends, -and returns from time to time to the books he loves so well. Whatever -influence has come to him with his high office, whatever favour he -enjoys with his wealthy king, he uses all for the good of the state and -for the assistance of his friends. Ever fond of conferring benefits and -wonderfully prone to pity, his disposition has grown with his power of -indulging it. Some he helps with money, to others he gives protection, -and others he recommends for promotion. When he can help in no other -way he does it by his advice: no one is sent away dejected. You -might well say that he had been appointed the public guardian of the -distressed and needy.” - -If the cares of state did not cut off Sir Thomas More from assisting -old acquaintances, they made great inroads into the home life he loved -so well. He had married again on the death of his first wife, and -his letters to his children, especially to his “most dear daughter, -Margaret”--Roper’s wife--are full of tenderness. He is anxious about -the education of his children, and rejoices that his daughter shares -his love for books. We find him writing to Margaret Roper just after -her marriage in 1522:-- - -“I am therefore delighted to read that you have made up your mind -to give yourself diligently to philosophy, and to make up by your -earnestness in future for what you have lost in the past by neglect. -My darling Margaret, I indeed have never found you idling, and your -unusual learning in almost every kind of literature shows that you -have been making active progress. So I take your words as an example -of the great modesty that makes you prefer to accuse yourself falsely -of sloth rather than to boast of your diligence, unless your meaning -is that you will give yourself so earnestly to study that your past -history will seem like indolence by comparison.... Though I earnestly -hope that you will devote the rest of your life to medical science and -sacred literature, so that you may be well furnished for the whole -scope of human life, which is to have a healthy soul in a healthy body, -and I know that you have already laid the foundations of these studies, -and there will be always opportunity to continue the building; yet I am -of opinion that you may with great advantage give some years of your -yet flourishing youth to humane letters and liberal studies.... It -would be a delight, my dear Margaret, to me to converse long with you -on these matters, but I have just been interrupted and called away by -the servants, who have brought in supper. I must have regard to others, -else to sup is not so sweet as to talk with you.”[86] - -The close friend of Erasmus and Dean Colet, an accepted champion of the -New Learning, More was naturally enthusiastic for education--for girls -as for boys. He had written to Gunnell, for a time the tutor of his -family:-- - -“Though I prefer learning, joined with virtue, to all the treasures -of kings, yet renown for learning, when it is not united with a good -life, is nothing else than splendid and notorious infamy: this would be -especially the case in a woman.... Since erudition in woman is a new -thing and a reproach to the sloth of men, many will gladly assail it -and impute to literature what is really the fault of nature, thinking -from the vices of the learned to get their own ignorance esteemed as -virtue. On the other hand if a woman (and this I desire and hope with -you as the teacher for all my daughters) to eminent virtue should add -an outwork of even moderate skill in literature, I think she will have -more real profit than if she had obtained the riches of Crœsus and the -beauty of Helen.” - -In this letter More goes on to speak of the profit of learning and the -happiness of those who give themselves to it--“possessing solid joy -they will neither be puffed up by the empty praises of men nor dejected -by evil tongues.” - -“These I consider the genuine fruits of learning, and though I admit -that all literary men do not possess them, I would maintain that those -who give themselves to study with such views (avoiding the precipices -of pride and haughtiness, walking in the pleasant meadows of modesty, -not dazzled at the sight of gold) will easily attain their end and -become perfect. Nor do I think that the harvest will be much affected -whether it is a man or a woman who sows the field. They both have the -same human nature, which reason differentiates from those of beasts; -both therefore are equally suited for those studies for which reason is -perfectioned, and becomes fruitful like a ploughed land on which the -seed of good lessons has been sown.” - -This strong love for wise learning, laying emphasis on a complete -education--the training in virtue no less than the knowledge of -letters--had its roots in More’s character. The “genuine fruits of -learning” ripen in his life and death. His wide toleration, which will -blame no man for not taking the path he trod to martyrdom, is coupled -inextricably with a refinement of conscience that cannot be sullied by -a denial of his faith. The freedom of conscience Thomas More claimed -for himself he most willingly allows to others. Just as the education -he valued for himself he extends to all his children. - -Standing largely aloof from the violent controversies Luther had -started, hating the bitter intolerance and savage abuse of theological -strife, refusing to be drawn into the deadly discussion of Henry -VIII.’s divorce, Sir Thomas More is content to live in loyal devotion -to his religion and to the service of the state, if haply he may. And -when this is denied him he is content to die, retaining his tolerant -good-humour and the love of his kind to the end, and without resentment -at his fate. - -The courage of the sage never failed Sir Thomas More in his public -work. As “a beardless boy” he had resisted in parliament the king’s -extortions, as speaker of the House of Commons he protected the -privileges of the commons. Wolsey had come down to the House with all -his train to command a subsidy, but no word was uttered in reply to his -address. In vain Wolsey appealed for an answer, Sir Thomas More could -only declare that the speaker, then the mouthpiece of the commons, had -nothing to say till he had heard the opinion of the House. “Whereupon, -the cardinal, displeased with Sir Thomas More that had not in this -parliament in all things satisfied his desire, suddenly arose and -departed.” - -High as More stood at that time in the affection of Henry, Sir -Thomas knew the king, and the nature of the favour of princes. Roper -relates that when he offered his congratulations, at the time of the -appointment to the chancellorship of the Duchy of Lancaster, More -answered, “I may tell thee I have no cause to be proud thereof, for -if my head would win him a castle in France (for then was there war -betwixt us) it should not fail to go.” - -Aware of Henry’s character, More yet had no choice but to accept the -lord chancellorship from the king on Wolsey’s fall in 1529. It was -no matter for personal satisfaction, and More’s reply to the Duke of -Norfolk was substantially the same as his previous answer to Roper: -“Considering how wise and honourable a prelate had lately before taken -so great a fall, he had no cause to rejoice in his new dignity.” -Erasmus wrote, “I do not at all congratulate More, nor literature; but -I do indeed congratulate England, for a better or holier judge could -not have been appointed.” - -On November 3rd, 1529, Sir Thomas More, as chancellor, opened -parliament, and in a long speech declared that “the cause of its -assembly was to reform such things as had been used or permitted by -inadvertence, or by changes of time had become inexpedient.” It was the -opening of the seven years’ parliament, and before six years should -run, this same parliament would, at the king’s order, condemn Sir -Thomas More by act of attainder. - -The position of the new chancellor was dangerous from the first. Wolsey -had fallen because he had failed to help Henry to a divorce from his -queen, Catherine of Aragon, and More had been made his successor -because the king had counted on him to accomplish the “great matter.” -All that Sir Thomas could hope for was that he might be allowed to do -his work as chancellor without being mixed up with divorce proceedings. -As long as he was not called upon to declare publicly that the divorce -was right, he had no wish to interfere in the matter. First to last -no word of approval came from More’s lips to encourage Henry in the -divorce, but he was not the man to express judgment on a case that he -did not wish brought before him.[87] In the end the chancellor’s very -silence turned Henry’s disappointment to active displeasure, and More’s -life was taken in savage revenge for non-compliance with the royal will. - -Henry’s divorce dates the beginning of the Protestant Reformation in -England--of that ecclesiastical revolution in which the supremacy of -Rome was rejected, the crown superseded the pope as supreme head of -the Church of England, and England was detached from the rest of Roman -Catholic Christendom. In the reigns of Edward VI. and Elizabeth the -revolution proceeded still further, and Catholic rites and doctrines, -service books and ceremonies were rigorously cast out of the Church -of England, and all who adhered to the old order in religion were -punished by law. But those days were far off as yet. - -More, at the outset of this revolution, declines to follow the king in -the rejection of the old allegiance to Rome. All he asks for is freedom -of conscience to remain in the faith of his fathers, to worship as -Christians in England had worshipped since the coming of Augustine. To -escape death by giving up this freedom is impossible for Sir Thomas -More. - -The divorce from Queen Catherine is the turning point in More’s worldly -fortunes as well as in ecclesiastical affairs in England. - -Eighteen years passed from the day of Henry’s marriage to Catherine, -on his accession to the throne, before the divorce was mooted. The -scruple was that Catherine had been formerly betrothed to his dead -brother Arthur; the moving force of Henry’s petition for divorce was -the desire to marry Anne Boleyn. Unable to get the marriage annulled at -Rome, or to get a favourable opinion from the universities, Henry fell -back on Archbishop Cranmer to decree the divorce, and finally this was -done in 1533, all appeals to Rome being henceforth forbidden. Henry -had already, in 1531, called upon the clergy to acknowledge him as the -supreme head of the Church of England, and the following year they were -required to surrender the ancient right to meet and enact canons.[88] - -In these four years the chancellor had kept out of political life as -far as he could, and had given his attention to his judicial work. But -in May, 1532, he resigned the great seal into the king’s hands, “seeing -that affairs were going badly, and likely to be worse, and that if he -retained his office he would be obliged to act against his conscience, -or incur the king’s displeasure as he had already begun to do, for -refusing to take his part against the clergy. His excuse was that his -salary was too small, and that he was not equal to the work. Everyone -is concerned, for there never was a better man in the office.”[89] - -Nothing is known of Sir Thomas More’s work in the chancery except his -integrity and his despatch. “When More took the office there were -causes that had remained undecided for twenty years. He presided so -dexterously and successfully that once after taking his seat and -deciding a case, when the next case was called, it was found that -there was no second case for trial. Such a thing is said never to have -happened before or since.” (Stapleton.) - -For nearly two years More lived unmolested after his resignation of -the chancellorship; but he had incurred the enmity of the king and the -hatred of Anne Boleyn, and Henry was swiftly driving at certain changes -in religion that were to bring Sir Thomas More to the Tower and the -block, and many another honest Christian to the prison and the gallows -of Tyburn. - -In June, 1533, after Cranmer had duly pronounced Henry’s marriage with -Catherine void, came the coronation of Anne Boleyn, and Sir Thomas More -declined an invitation from some of the bishops to be present at the -celebration. He knew that his absence would be marked unfavourably by -the king, and was ready to pay the penalty; but his care in avoiding -the expression of any disapproval of Henry’s proceedings required an -equal care that no approval should be expressed. To have been present -at the coronation of Anne would have been, for More, to condone the -divorce. - -In the autumn came an attempt to include More, with Bishop Fisher -and certain monks and friars, in the treason of the “Holy Maid of -Kent,”--Elizabeth Barton, a Canterbury nun. The “treason” amounted to -this, that the nun, who was given to prophesying, declared that God had -revealed to her to speak against Henry’s divorce, and it was sufficient -to bring her to Tyburn. But against Sir Thomas More no shred of -evidence could be procured, for none existed. He had seen the nun, and -talked with her, and “held her in great estimation,” but would neither -commit himself to a belief in her visions, nor permit any discussion on -the king’s doings; but wrote to the nun a letter which could not have -been more prudent, as he exhorted her “to attend to devotion, and not -meddle in the affairs of princes.” - -The name of Sir Thomas More was struck out of the bill of attainder, -but the days of his liberty were already numbered. - -The Act of Succession, passed in March, 1534, made Mary, the daughter -of Henry and Catherine, illegitimate, and Elizabeth, Anne’s child, -the heir to the throne. The act also declared that “all the nobles of -the realm, spiritual and temporal, and all other subjects arrived at -full age, should be obliged to take corporal oath, in the presence -of the king or his commissioners, to observe and maintain the whole -effect and contents of the act,” under the penalties for treason for -refusal. The words of the oath were not inserted in the act, and the -commissioners drew up a formula, requiring all persons to affirm in -addition that the marriage with Catherine was invalid, and the marriage -with Anne valid, and further to recall and repudiate allegiance to any -foreign authority, prince, or potentate. This was a much larger demand -than parliament had authorised, for it contained a denial of the papal -supremacy, while all that the act had required was an acknowledgment -of the succession to the crown. The pope had only just given his final -decision on Henry’s appeal for divorce (March, 1534), and the decision -had been against the king and in favour of the marriage. The oath now -administered was in direct opposition to the supremacy of Rome, and -as such was impossible to the consciences of men like Sir Thomas More -and Bishop Fisher, though the great bulk of the clergy took it without -giving any trouble. - -More was quite prepared to swear to the succession of Elizabeth. -Parliament had, in his eyes, a plain right to decide who should wear -the crown, and the doctrine of divine hereditary kingship does not -come in till the Stuarts. But this mere willingness to comply with -the letter of the law was not sufficient. More’s silent want of -sympathy with the divorce, and with the breach it involved with Rome, -was intolerable to Henry, who had counted More amongst his dearest -friends; for friend or foe, in Henry’s power, could only live by abject -agreement with the royal pleasure. No king had three more faithful -servants than Henry VIII. had in Thomas Wolsey, Thomas More, and -Thomas Cromwell, and no king destroyed his ministers with such fierce -caprice. - -Sir Thomas More, unable to take the oath, was sent to the Tower in -April, 1534, Bishop Fisher having already been lodged there. In -November parliament met again, and passed the Act of Supremacy, making -Henry VIII. “the supreme head of the Church of England,” and declaring -that on and after the first of February, 1535, it was high treason -“to deprive the king’s most royal person, the queen’s, or their heirs -apparent of their dignity, title or name of their royal estates, or -slanderously and maliciously publish or pronounce, by express writing -or words, that the king, our sovereign lord, should be heretic, -schismatic, tyrant, infidel, etc.” Under this act Sir Thomas More was -to be assailed and to die. That the martyrdom was a “judicial murder” -is plain--to Lord Campbell it was “the blackest crime that ever has -been perpetrated in England under the form of law.”[90] - -The indictment was for treason, and on July 1st, a week after Bishop -Fisher’s execution, Sir Thomas More was brought before the judges. -To the charge of having refused the king, “maliciously, falsely, and -traitorously, his title of supreme head of the Church of England,” -More answered that the statute had been passed while he was in prison, -and that he was dead to the world, and had not cared about such -things--“your statute cannot condemn me to death for such silence, for -neither your statute nor any laws in the world punish people except for -words and deeds--surely not for keeping silence.” - -“To this the king’s proctor replied that such silence was a certain -proof of malice intended against the statute, especially as every -faithful subject, on being questioned about the statute, was obliged -to answer categorically that the statute was good and wholesome.” -“Surely,” replied More, “if common law is true, and he who is silent -seems to consent, my silence should rather be taken as approval than -contempt of your statute.” - -To the first article charging him with having always maliciously -opposed the king’s second marriage, More had answered that anything -he had said had been according to his conscience, and that for “this -error,” he had already suffered fifteen months’ imprisonment, and the -confiscation of his property. - -The trial was soon over, for the king had decided on More’s death -when Fisher was executed, ordering the preachers to set forth to the -people the treasons of the late Bishop of Rochester and of Sir Thomas -More; “joining them together though the later was still untried.”[91] -The jury, after a quarter of an hour’s absence, declared him guilty -of death for maliciously contravening the statute, and sentence was -pronounced by the chancellor “according to the tenour of the new law.” - -Death being now in sight, and faith having been kept with his -conscience, More has no longer any reason to observe silence. To the -usual question whether he has anything to say against the sentence, he -replied, that for the seven years he had studied the matter he could -not find that supremacy in a church belonged to a layman, or to any but -the see of Rome, as granted personally by our Lord when on earth to -St. Peter and his successors; and that, as the city of London could not -make a law against the laws of the realm of England, so England could -not make a law contrary to the general law of Christ’s Catholic Church; -and that the Magna Charta of England said that “the English Church -should be free to enjoy all its rights,” as the king had sworn at his -consecration. Interrupted by the chancellor with the inquiry whether -he wished to be considered wiser and better than all the bishops -and nobles of the realm who had sworn to the king’s supremacy, More -retorted, “For one bishop of your opinion, my lord, I have a hundred -saints of mine; and for one parliament of yours, and God knows of what -kind, I have all the general councils for a thousand years.” The Duke -of Norfolk said that now his malice was clear. - -On the sixth of July, 1535, Sir Thomas More was beheaded on Tower Hill, -for the king remitted the ferocious mutilations that accompanied the -executions for treason at Tyburn. “The scaffold was very unsteady, and -putting his feet on the ladder, he said, merrily, to the lieutenant of -the Tower: “I pray thee see me safe up, and for my coming down let me -shift for myself.”[92] - -Then, with a simple request to the people standing round to pray for -him, and to bear witness that he died a Catholic for the faith of -the Catholic Church, a friendly word to the executioner, and a last -prayer--the 51st Psalm--the axe fell, and More was dead. - -Beyond More’s scholarship and wit, and his affection for his family -and friends, stands out his great, unflinching quality of loyalty to -conscience. When the power was in his hands as lord chancellor, no one -was put to death by Sir Thomas More for heresy in England, though he -did what he could by his pen to check the innovations of Luther, which -he hated,--not only because they broke up the unity of Christendom, -but because, it seemed to him, they struck at all social morality and -decency.[93] The violence of Luther’s outbreak, the determination -of the Lutherans--sure of their own possession of the truth--to -allow no liberty to Catholics, and the antinomian communism of the -anabaptists--all these things made Protestantism detestable to men like -Sir Thomas More and Erasmus, and made More declare that dogmatising -heretics ought to be repressed by the state as breeders of strife and -contention. But his own record is clear: “And of all that ever came in -my hand for heresy, as help me God, saving (as I said) the sure keeping -of them, had never any of them any stripe or stroke given them, so much -as a fillip on the forehead.”[94] - -“What other controversialist can be named, who, having the power -to crush antagonists whom he viewed as the disturbers of the quiet -of his own declining years, the destroyers of all the hopes which -he had cherished for mankind, contented himself with severity of -language?”[95] - -The author of the _Utopia_ was a critic, as Colet and Erasmus were, -of abuses in the Church; but like his friends he lived and died a -Catholic. He saw Lutheranism as the source of a thousand ills, and with -Erasmus opposed it; but though heretics were anti-social and factious, -he would not put one to death for error. - -It is all through Sir Thomas More’s character--this respect for -conscience. There is no going back on the wide toleration of his early -manhood, and high office and responsibilities of state no more cramp or -belittle his faith than they destroy his playfulness or the warmth of -his affections. - -He died a martyr for the religion of his life, for the simple right to -abide in the old Catholic paths of his fellow-countrymen. - -As Sir Thomas More was not the first of the Catholic martyrs at the -Reformation, for he had seen his old friends, the Carthusian monks, -carried to Tyburn, so he was not the last. For the next fifty years -of Henry and Elizabeth, English men and women were to suffer for -the old faith of England, and in Mary’s reign to die as bravely for -Protestantism. - -In spite of monasteries and priories destroyed, and parish churches -stripped and plundered, in spite of penal laws which banned its -priesthood and proscribed its worship, the Catholicism More died for -has endured in England. All that parliament could do to exterminate -the belief in papal supremacy has been done; all that panic and -prejudice could accomplish by “popish plots” to the same end has been -accomplished. These things have been no more successful than the -mad “no popery” riots of Lord George Gordon in crushing the faith -of the Roman Catholic minority. The penal laws have gone, Catholic -emancipation has been obtained, a Catholic hierarchy has been set up, -and to-day in England the freedom of conscience that was refused to Sir -Thomas More is the accepted liberty of all. - -In 1887 Sir Thomas More, with Bishop Fisher and the Carthusian martyrs, -were beatified by Pope Leo XIII. Serving their religion in life and -death, they served the cause of human liberty, withstanding Henry as -Anselm withstood the Red King, and as Langton withstood John. - - - - -Robert Ket and The Norfolk Rising - -1549 - - -AUTHORITIES: _The Commotion in Norfolk_, by Nicholas Sotherton, -1576 (Harleian MS.); _De Furoribus Norfolciensum_, by Nevylle, 1575 -(Translated into English by Wood, 1615); Holinshed--_Chronicle_; -Sir John Hayward--_Life of Edward VI._; Strype--_Memorials_; -Blomefield--_History of Norfolk_; F. W. Russell--_Kett’s Rebellion_; W. -Rye; _Victoria County History--Norfolk_. - - - - -ROBERT KET AND THE NORFOLK RISING. - -1549. - - -The Norfolk Rising of the sixteenth century was a land war, caused -directly by the enclosing of the common fields of the peasants, and the -break up of the accustomed rural life. - -The landowners finding greater profit in breeding sheep and cattle -than in the small holdings of peasants, began, about 1470, to seize -the fields which from time immemorial had been cultivated by the -country people in common, and to evict whole parishes by pulling down -all the dwelling places. For eighty years these clearances were going -on. Acts of Parliament were passed in 1489 and 1515 to prohibit the -“pulling down of towns” and to order the rebuilding of such towns, and -the restoration of pasture lands to tillage, but both acts were quite -inoperative. In 1517, Cardinal Wolsey’s Royal Commission on Enclosures -reported on the defiance of the law in seven Midland counties, where -more than 36,000 acres had been enclosed; but legal proceedings against -the landowners were stayed on the latter promising to make restitution. - -Thomas More, in the first part of his _Utopia_, in 1516, described for -all time what the enclosures he witnessed meant for England. - -“For look in what parts of the realm doth grow the finest and therefore -dearest wool, there noblemen and gentlemen, yea, and certain -abbots, holy men no doubt, not contenting themselves with the yearly -revenues and profits that were wont to grow to their forefathers and -predecessors of their lands, nor being content that they live in -rest and pleasure--nothing profiting, yea, much annoying the public -weal--leave no ground for tillage, they inclose all into pastures; -they throw down houses; they pluck down towns and leave nothing -standing but only the church to be made a sheep fold.... They turn all -dwelling-places and all glebe land into desolation and wilderness. -Therefore, that one covetous and insatiable comorant may compass about -and inclose many thousand acres of ground together within one pale or -hedge, the husbandmen be thrust out of their own, or else either by -cunning and fraud, or by violent oppression, or by wrongs and injuries -they be so wearied, that they be compelled to sell all. By one means -therefore or another, either by hook or by crook they must needs depart -away, men, women, husbands, wives, fatherless children, widows, mothers -with their young babies, and their whole household small in substance -and large in number, as husbandry requireth many hands. Away they -trudge, I say, out of their known and accustomed houses, finding no -place to rest in.... And when they have wandered abroad till the little -they have be spent, what can they then else do but steal, and then -justly be hanged, or else go about a begging. And yet then also they -be cast in prison as vagabonds, because they go about and work not: -whom no man will set a work, though they never so willingly proffer -themselves thereto. For one shepherd or herdsman is enough to eat up -that ground with cattle, to the occupying whereof about husbandry many -hands were requisite.” - -This was social England in the early years of Henry VIII., and every -year saw things grow worse for the rural folk, in spite of further -royal proclamations against enclosures in 1526. A series of bad -harvests drove a starving population to riot in Norfolk in 1527 and -1529. In 1536 came the suppression of 376 lesser monasteries, followed -two years later by the dissolution of all remaining monasteries and -priories, and in 1547 by the royal confiscation of the property of the -religious guilds and brotherhoods. - -The landowners having established a starving unemployed class by the -simple process of depriving people of access to the land, and the -crown having removed the only source of relief to the unemployed by -destroying the monasteries, it remained for parliament to deal with the -“social problem” thus created by declaring poverty a crime, and the -unemployed person a felon. The lash and the gallows were to solve the -problem. - -In 1531, an act of parliament granted licences to the impotent beggar, -and ordered a whipping for all other mendicants. Five years later -stronger measures were adopted, and whipping was only permitted to -first offenders: mutilation and hanging were the subsequent penalties -on conviction, and thousands of unemployed men and women suffered under -this act. But still the unemployed existed, for the enclosures had not -been stopped; and so the first year of Edward VI. saw an act passed -declaring the convicted unemployed “a slave.” (As it seemed to many -that parliament had got rid of papal authority only to bring back -slavery in England, this act was repealed in two years, and the act of -1531 revived.) - -The bitterness of the agrarian misery, the violent destruction of all -the old religious customs and habits of the people, the confiscation -of the funds of the guilds, the open despoiling of the parish churches -of the people[96]--all these things plunged the country into confusion -and despair. The general rising in Lincolnshire and the north in 1536 -(known as the “Pilgrimage of Grace”) against the suppressions of the -monasteries, and the rising in Cornwall and Devon in 1549 against -Edward’s VI.’s new Book of Common Prayer were strong manifestations of -the popular dislike of the changes made in religion by Henry VIII. and -the ministers of Edward VI. - -In Norfolk, in 1537, the people made an insurrection against the -suppression of the monasteries; but the later risings of 1540 (at -Griston, when one John Walker “exhorted the people to destroy the -gentry”), and in 1549, under Ket, were not concerned with the religious -troubles of the times, but were frankly agrarian. The Norfolk rising, -which Ket led, was no more connected with Protestantism than the -Peasant Revolt of 1381 was with Lollardy. Agrarian disturbances took -place in a number of counties in 1549. In May the peasants of Somerset -and Lincoln were in revolt, and in July there were tumults in Essex, -Kent, Wiltshire, Buckinghamshire, and Oxfordshire. A rude Cambridge -ballad of the time extols the pulling down of enclosures: - - Cast hedge and ditch in the lake, - Fixed with many a stake; - Though they be never so fast, - Yet asunder they are wrest. - Sir, I think that this work - Is as good as to build a kirk. - -In 1548 Protector Somerset had followed Wolsey’s footsteps in issuing -a proclamation for a royal commission to inquire and report concerning -enclosures, and to give the names of all who kept more than two -thousand sheep or who had “taken from any other their commons.”[97] -The commissioners were also “to reform” any cases of the enclosing of -commons and highways, “without due recompense,” which they might find; -“and to the intent your doings may proceed without all suspicion, and -the people conceive some good hope of reformation at your hands, we -would that as many of you as be in any of the cases to be reformed, do -first, for example’s sake, begin to the reformation of yourselves.” - -Somerset’s ingenuous suggestion was naturally disregarded by the -commissioners, and beyond making inquiries and publishing a report--to -the effect that in the counties of Suffolk, Essex, Hertford, Kent, and -Worcester nearly all the common lands[98] had been enclosed, while in -Norfolk and Northampton large enclosures had been made--the commission -of 1548 was as fruitless as its predecessors. Somerset, however, got -some reputation by it as an enemy to the enclosures, and certainly -incurred the dislike of the landowners. But where Wolsey, in the -hey-day of power, had failed, there was small chance of success for -Somerset, with the country in a state of anarchy, and the nation rent -and distracted by a violent revolution in the Church. - -The only strong movement to prevent the utter downfall of the -country-people was the Norfolk Rising, which Robert Ket directed in -the summer of 1549. It failed in the end, but for more than six weeks -the power of the landlords was broken round Norwich, their enclosures -were stopped, and the hope of better things filled the hearts of the -peasants. - -The rising began at Attleborough on 20th June when Squire Green, of -Wylby, set up fences and hedges round the common lands at Harpham and -Attleborough, and the people, excited by news that in Kent similar -fences had been destroyed, proceeded to pull them down. For the next -fortnight the revolt had neither leaders nor organization. “There were -secret meetings of men running hither and thither, and then withdrawing -themselves for secret conferences, but at length they all began to -deal tumultuously and to rage openly.” On July 7th the annual feast at -Wymondham, in honour of the translation of St. Thomas of Canterbury, -brought the country folk together from miles round; and at the close -of the fair they all set off to break down the fences set up round the -common lands at Hetherset by one Sergeant Flowerdew.[99] - -Flowerdew, unable to save his fences, proposed a diversion. The Kets at -Wymondham had made enclosures, why shouldn’t the rioters deal with them -in similar fashion? Flowerdew actually paid over 40d. to encourage an -attack on the Kets. - -Robert Ket and his brother were well-known men. Both were craftsmen, -Robert, a tanner, and William, a butcher. They were landowners besides, -and men of substance and of old family, for it was said the Kets had -been in the land since the Norman Conquest. Robert Ket held three -manors from the Earl of Warwick; his yearly income was put down at £50, -and his property valued at 1,000 marks. Like other landowners, the Kets -had made enclosures, but on the arrival of the people from Hetherset -they at once declared themselves willing to stand by the movement for -freeing the land. Robert Ket felt the misery of his neighbours. He -saw that if the revolt was to be anything more than a local riot it -must have necessary guidance, and his sympathies were entirely on the -democratic side. And so from that time forward he gave up the quiet of -a country gentleman’s life at Wymondham for the strenuous movement of -an insurgent camp. - -To the appeal of the people for help, Ket answered passionately, “I -am ready, and will be ready at all times, to do whatever, not only to -repress, but to subdue the power of great men. Whatsoever lands I have -enclosed shall again be made common unto ye and all men, and my own -hands shall first perform it.” - -Then Robert Ket went on to commit himself body and soul to the -movement, resolved that the peasants should not be left unaided in the -struggle they had begun, and willing to take upon himself the burden -and responsibility of leadership. - -“You shall have me, if you will, not only as a companion, but as a -captain; and in the doing of the so great a work before us, not only as -a fellow, but for a leader, author and principal.” - -If the ambition which clutches at sovereignty and rule is despicable, -even more despicable is the weakness which refuses to take command at -times of peril. - -To Robert Ket and his brother there was no promise of the world’s -honour and glory should the rising be successful. At the best would -be the satisfaction of a battle fought and won for the deliverance of -long-suffering peasants. At the worst the laying down of life in a good -cause, as Geoffrey Litster and many a Norfolk man had done in bygone -days. - -Robert Ket’s leadership was acclaimed with enthusiasm, nor was it ever -disputed throughout the rising. In this, the last of the great popular -risings in England, the Norfolk men were as loyal to their leader as -the men of Kent were to Wat Tyler and Jack Cade. And in each case that -loyalty had ample justification. - -There were but a thousand men involved when the rising began, but under -Ket’s command the movement passed rapidly from the fluid “running -hither and thither” condition of the first fortnight, and became the -march of an organized army. - -On July 10th, two days after Ket took command, this army was on the -road to Norwich, and after crossing the river at Cringleford, lay -encamped at Eaton Wood. - -It is plain from Ket’s speeches to his men, and from “The Rebels’ -Complaint,” which he published at this time, that to Robert Ket the -rising was not only to put down enclosures, its aim was rather to -strike at the root of the evil and to put an end to the ascendancy of -the landlord class, and make England a free commonwealth. Either the -people must put down landlords, or very soon the landlords would have -the whole land in their possession, and the people would be in hopeless -and helpless subjection. Had not an act of parliament been actually -passed making “slaves” of the landless men, dispossessed by enclosures? -When parliament was establishing slavery it was time for honest men to -be up and doing, rousing the people to action. - -Ket’s speech at Eaton Wood is a fierce attack on the landlords, and a -reminder that having ventured so far, the peasants must advance yet -further: - - Now are ye overtopped and trodden down by gentlemen, and put - out of possibility ever to recover foot. Rivers of riches ran - into the coffers of your landlords, while you are pair’d to the - quick, and fed upon pease and oats like beasts. You are fleeced - by these landlords for their private benefit, and as well kept - under by the public burdens of State wherein while the richer - sort favour themselves, ye are gnawn to the very bones. Your - tyrannous masters often implead, arrest, and cast you into - prison, so that they may the more terrify and torture you in - your minds, and wind your necks more surely under their arms. - And then they palliate these pilleries with the fair pretence - of law and authority! Fine workmen, I warrant you, are this law - and authority, who can do their dealings so closely that men - can only discover them for your undoing. Harmless counsels are - fit for tame fools; for you who have already stirred there is - no hope but in adventuring boldly. - -In “The Rebels’ Complaint,” the same note is struck. Only by taking -up arms, and mixing Heaven and earth together, can the intolerable -oppression of the landlords be ended. - - The pride of great men is now intolerable, but our condition - miserable. - - These abound in delights; and compassed with the fullness of - all things, and consumed with vain pleasures, thirst only after - gain, inflamed with the burning delights of their desires. - - But ourselves, almost killed with labour and watching, do - nothing all our life long but sweat, mourn, hunger, and thirst. - Which things, though they seem miserable and base (as they are - indeed most miserable), yet might be borne howsoever, if they - which are drowned in the boiling seas of evil delights did not - pursue the calamities and miseries of other men with too much - insolent hatred. But now both we and our miserable condition - is a laughing stock to these most proud and insolent men--who - are consumed with ease and idleness. Which thing (as it may) - grieveth us so sore and inflicteth such a stain of evil report, - so that nothing is more grievous for us to remember, nor more - unjust to suffer. - - The present condition of possessing land seemeth miserable - and slavish--holding it all at the pleasure of great men; not - freely, but by prescription, and, as it were, at the will and - pleasure of the lord. For as soon as any man offend any of - these gorgeous gentlemen, he is put out, deprived, and thrust - from all his goods. - - How long shall we suffer so great oppression to go unrevenged? - - For so far as they, the gentlemen, now gone in cruelty and - covetousness, that they are not content only to take all by - violence away from us, and to consume in riot and effeminate - delights what they get by force and villainy, but they must - also suck in a manner our blood and marrow out of our veins and - bones. - - The common pastures left by our predecessors for our relief and - our children are taken away. - - The lands which in the memory of our fathers were common, - those are ditched and hedged in and made several; the pastures - are enclosed, and we shut out. Whatsoever fowls of the air or - fishes of the water, and increase of the earth--all these do - they devour, consume, and swallow up; yea, nature doth not - suffice to satisfy their lusts, but they seek out new devices, - and, as it were, forms of pleasures to embalm and perfume - themselves, to abound in pleasant smells, to pour in sweet - things to sweet things. Finally, they seek from all places all - things for their desire and the provocation of lust. While - we in the meantime eat herbs and roots, and languish with - continual labour, and yet are envied that we live, breathe, and - enjoy common air! - - Shall they, as they have brought hedges about common pastures, - enclose with their intolerable lusts also all the commodities - and pleasures of this life, which Nature, the parent of us all, - would have common, and bringeth forth every day, for us, as - well as for them? - - We can no longer bear so much, so great, and so cruel injury; - neither can we with quiet minds behold so great covetousness, - excess, and pride of the nobility. We will rather take arms, - and mix Heaven and earth together, than endure so great cruelty. - - Nature hath provided for us, as well as for them; hath given us - a body and a soul, and hath not envied us other things. While - we have the same form, and the same condition of birth together - with them, why should they have a life so unlike unto ours, and - differ so far from us in calling? - - We see that things have now come to extremities, and we will - prove the extremity. We will rend down hedges, fill up ditches, - and make a way for every man into the common pasture. Finally, - we will lay all even with the ground, which they, no less - wickedly than cruelly and covetously, have enclosed. Neither - will we suffer ourselves any more to be pressed with such - burdens against our wills, nor endure so great shame, since - living out our days under such inconveniences we should leave - the commonwealth unto our posterity--mourning, and miserable, - and much worse than we received it of our fathers. - - Wherefore we will try all means; neither will we ever rest - until we have brought things to our own liking. - - We desire liberty and an indifferent (or equal) use of all - things. This will we have. Otherwise these tumults and our - lives shall only be ended together. - -Revolutionary as this manifesto is, Robert Ket is seen all through the -rising exerting his authority on behalf of law and good order, curbing -anarchy and checking ferocity in the rebel camp. - -Only one day was spent at Eaton Wood. Ket’s plan was to advance to -Mousehold, a wide stretch of high, well-wooded ground to the east of -Norwich. Here the camp was fixed on July 12th, the river having been -crossed at Hailsdon, and a night’s halt called at Drayton--for the -mayor of Norwich, Thomas Cod, positively refused to allow the rebels to -pass through the city. Ket, anxious to unite citizens and peasants in -a common cause, willingly avoided altercation, and Cod, alarmed at the -rising, and unable to dissuade the insurgents from their enterprise, -was careful to refrain from all hostile demonstrations. Cod’s one -purpose was to exclude Ket’s army from the city, and to accomplish -this he kept on friendly terms with Ket, even while appealing to the -government to send down troops to suppress the rising. Ket’s purpose -was to break down landlord rule in Norfolk, extend the area of revolt, -and to get the king to attend to the complaints of his subjects. - -Ket’s company at Mousehold numbered no more than 2,600 on July 12th; -but the ringing of bells and the firing of beacons brought in thousands -of homeless men. At the end of a week 20,000 men were enrolled under -the banner of revolt, and now Ket had all his work to do in maintaining -discipline and in arranging for provisions for the camp. - -It is clear Robert Ket was the right man for a leader.[100] The -people trusted him and obeyed his orders. Cod and two other -reputable citizens of Norwich--Aldrich, an alderman, and Watson, a -preacher--attended the camp daily, and along with Ket and his brother -William sat under a great tree, known as the Oak of Reformation, and -administered justice. The 20,000 hungry, disinherited men carried out -in as orderly way as they could the instructions they received. - -Ket’s first business was to send to the king a plain statement of -“Requests and Demands.” He knew what was wanted for rural England, and -refused to admit that his purpose was disloyal or that his conduct was -rebellion. - -The “Requests” were twenty-nine, and they contained a full statement -of the grievances of the country folk. The chief requests were for the -stoppage of enclosures, the enactment of fair rents, the restoration -of common fishing rights in sea and river, the appointment of resident -clergymen in every parish to preach and instruct the children, and -the free election or official appointment of local “commissioners” -for the enforcement of the laws. One significant prayer was “that all -bond men may be made free, for God made all free with His precious -bloodshedding.” - -This document, which was signed by Ket, Cod and Aldrich,[101] was -answered by the arrival of a herald from the king with a promise that -parliament should meet in October to consider their complaints, and -that something should be done to redress their grievances, if in the -meantime they would quietly disperse to their homes. - -All this was too vague and uncertain for Ket. Not till some definite -step was taken by king or parliament to end the present distress was -he willing to lay down his arms and bid his followers disperse. He had -put his hand to the plough, and no turning back was possible while the -evils he had risen against flourished unchecked. - -So Ket put his house in order on Mousehold Heath. The Oak of -Reformation was boarded over “with rafters,” and to this place -of summary justice landowners were brought and tried for making -enclosures. Two men were chosen by the commons from every hundred to -assist in the work of administration, and all the people were strictly -admonished “to beware of robbing, spoiling and other evil demeanours.” -As the army had to be victualled, Ket sent out men armed with his -official warrant requiring the country houses to provide cattle and -corn, “so that no violence or injury be done to any honest or poor -man,” and this requisition brought in guns, gunpowder and money, in -addition to “all kinds of victual.” The smaller farmers sent their -contributions “with much private good will,” while on the landowners a -great fear had fallen, and it seemed that the day of their might was -passed. - -A royal messenger bearing commissions of the peace to various country -gentlemen falling into the hands of Ket, he was at once deprived of -these documents and sent on his way. Ket filled in the names of men who -had joined the rising on these commissions, and these new magistrates -gave assistance in maintaining order. - -Cod and Aldrich were shocked at the arrest of landowners. -“Notwithstanding were divers gentlemen taken and brought to prison, -some in Norwich Prison, some in Norwich Castle and some in Surrey -Place.”--St. Leonard’s Hill. - -In every case the lives of the landowners were spared. Stern and -unmoved by respect of persons was Robert Ket, but there was no taint -of cruelty, meanness or bloodthirstiness in his rule. It was not his -purpose to raise civil war or leave a festering sore of hatred by -putting his neighbours to death. To destroy the power of the landlords -and ensure the right of an evicted people to live on the land was the -aim of the Norfolk Rising. - -At the end of the first week relations became strained between Cod and -the army on Mousehold. - -It was the custom to have prayers every day under the Oak, and Dr. -Conyers, vicar of St. Martin’s, Norwich, acted as chaplain. “Grave -persons and good divines” would come out from the city and preach under -the Oak, and on one occasion Dr. Matthew Parker, a Norwich man, who -had been chaplain to Anne Boleyn, and who was to become Archbishop of -Canterbury under Elizabeth, filled the pulpit. Parker’s sermon, full of -rebukes on the rising and praise of Edward VI., was so obnoxious, for -“he touched them for their living so near that they went near to touch -him for his life,” that Conyers only prevented a riot by striking up -the “Te Deum” in English, and during the singing Parker withdrew “to -sing his part at home.” - -Matthew Parker was a great man in Norwich (his brother Thomas -became mayor), and the incivility he had received at Mousehold gave -great offence. Cod and the aldermen sent off Leonard Sutherton, a -respectable burgess, to report to the king’s council the doings in -Norfolk, and Sutherton brought back from London a royal herald, who -went out to Mousehold and promised the king’s pardon to all that would -depart quietly to their homes. - -The people cheered and shouted “God save the king’s majesty,” but to -Ket this talk of pardon was altogether beside the mark. With some -dignity he informed the herald that “kings and princes are wont to -pardon wicked persons, not innocent and just men,” and added, “I trust -I have done nothing but what belongs to the duty of a true subject.” - -The herald then called on John Petibone, the sword-bearer of Norwich, -who with other civic notables was standing by, to arrest Robert Ket. -But the thing was impossible. Ket had 20,000 men at his back, and the -sword-bearer was supported by half-a-dozen elderly members of the town -council. All that could be done was to escort the herald into the city, -leaving Ket to his own devices. - -There was no more peace between the camp at Mousehold and the city of -Norwich after this. Hitherto Mayor Cod had retained the keys of the -city, and his authority had been respected by Ket. At the same time -Ket’s men had gone freely to and fro throughout the city without let -or hindrance. Now all was changed. First the landowners were being -arrested and despoiled, then the learned doctor, Matthew Parker (was he -not master of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge?) had been interrupted -and hooted, and now a king’s herald was contemned! Cod ordered the city -gates to be made fast, commanded Ket’s prisoners to be released, and -placed the city’s ordnance in the meadows by the river. This amounted -to a declaration of war, and Ket replied by bringing up his guns. - -The night of July 21st was spent “in fearful shot on both sides,” but -little injury was done. For Ket’s guns brought “more fear than hurt to -the city,” and “the city ordnance did not much annoy the enemy.” - -In the morning Ket sought to renew peace by asking permission for the -transport of victuals through the city, “as the custom was of late,” -and warning the mayor that refusal would provoke fire and sword. - -Cod refused permission, and Ket opened fire on the city gates. But “for -lack of powder and want of skill in the gunners the ordnance was spent -to small and little purpose.” A desperate encounter followed, with -bows and arrows for the chief weapons of offence. Boys from Mousehold, -“naked and unarmed, would pluck the arrows from their bodies and hand -them to the rebels to fire at the city.” At Bishopsgate a number of men -swam the river and forced their way into the city, and on the night of -July 22nd Norwich was in the hands of Robert Ket. - -No reprisals followed. The herald made a last attempt to induce -the insurgents to disperse by promising pardons, and was greeted -derisively. “Depart with a plague on thee!” they cried. “To the devil -with these idle promises. We shall only be oppressed afterwards.” -Forthwith the herald did depart, with eight pounds of gold in his -pocket from the mayor. - -Ket retired to Mousehold, the passage through the city having been -secured, and Cod accompanied him, leaving a deputy, Augustine Steward, -who lived in the big house in Tombland, opposite Erfingham Gate, to act -as mayor. - -Judgment went on as before under the Oak of Reformation, and people -clamoured for the landowners to be hanged. “So hated at this time -was the name of worship or gentleman, that the basest of the people, -burning with more than hostile hatred, desired to extinguish, and -utterly cut off, not only the gentry themselves, but if it were -possible, all the offspring and hope of them.” (Nevylle.) - -But Ket was as strong in his mercy as in his resistance to the land -enclosers. The gentry were imprisoned, and made to pay tribute: -their fences were pulled down, but their lives were spared, and no -hurt befell them. In the city Steward, no friend to Ket, was left -undisturbed in authority. - -At the end of July came William Parr, Marquis of Northampton, with -1,500 soldiers, mostly Italian mercenaries, and a number of country -squires with their retainers, to put down the rising. Steward at -once admitted him to the city; but Northampton--Henry VIII.’s -brother-in-law--was neither a soldier nor statesman, and after two -days’ hard fighting he fled from Norwich, utterly defeated. - -Ket’s men were badly armed, but they had numbers on their side, and -they fought for freedom and for very life. They swam the river, as -before, and forced an entrance. “Half dead, drowned in their own and -other men’s blood, they would not give over; but till the last gasp, -when their hands could scarce hold their weapons, would strike at their -adversaries.” - -Lord Sheffield fell in the fight on August 1st, killed by a stalwart -rebel--one Fulke, a butcher and carpenter by trade--and some hundred of -Ket’s men lay dead. The city suffered. Several houses and city gates -were fired, and only a heavy rain prevented the flames from spreading. -(This same rain drove many of the rebels to take refuge in the -cathedral, much to the annoyance of the dean and chapter.) - -And now for three weeks Ket had to take charge of Norwich as well as -of Mousehold camp, for it was impossible to trust Steward. Many of the -wealthier townsmen hastened away to Cambridge and London, leaving their -wives and families behind. Trade was at an end. - - The state of the city began to be in most miserable case, so - that all men looked for utter destruction, both of life and - goods. Then the remnant that feared God, seeing the plague - thus of sorrow increasing, fell to prayer and holy life, and - wished but to see the day that after they might talk thereover, - looking never to recover help again, nor to see their city - prosper. - - The women resorted twice a day to prayer, and the servants - (except what must needs stay at home) did the same. When Ket’s - ambassadors were sent to any private house they were fain - to bake or brew or do any work for the camp, else they were - carried as traitors to the Oak. As for trading, there was none - in the city, people being forced to hide up their choicest - goods, and happy were they that had the faithfullest servants. - - They that did keep open their shops were robbed and spoiled, - and their goods were measured by the arm’s length and dispersed - among the rebels; their children they set away for fear of - fire. I, the writer (who was then above twenty-two years of - age, and an eye-witness) was present after prayer during this - dolorous state, when people met and bewailed the miserable - state they were in. (Sutherton.) - -But for all their misery the tradesmen of Norwich were in no fear for -their lives. The city had done its best to thwart the rising, but Ket -treated it generously, allowing neither pillage nor bloodshed--though -he did not scruple to take what goods were necessary for his army.[102] -It was beyond the power of man to prevent all thieving during those -first few weeks of August, for the civic magistracy was gone, and Ket -had large responsibilities on his hands. - -The hope that the rising would become general turned to disappointment -in the weeks that passed after the flight of Northampton. In Suffolk -a number of men rose at Ket’s call, and made an unsuccessful attempt -to take Yarmouth. A small camp set up at Rising Chase was dispersed, -but for a fortnight the peasants gathered at Watton, and stopped the -passages of the river at Thetford and Brandon Ferry. For want of -leadership they then came on to Mousehold. At Hingham a rising was -put down by Sir Edmund Knyvett. And while Ket waited, hoping against -hope for better news, the fugitive citizens from Norwich had already -persuaded Somerset to send down an army to crush the revolt. - -On August 21st the Earl of Warwick, with 14,000 troops, reached -Cambridge, and three days later was at Norwich. - -Warwick, Henry VIII.’s high chamberlain, the son of Dudley, Henry -VII.’s minister, was a man of war and resolution. Sent down to suppress -the rising he did his work, but not till he had tried an appeal to the -peasants to disperse without further trouble. - -Halting outside the city, Warwick sent a herald to proclaim pardon to -all who should now return to their homes, and, as before, the people -shouted, “God save King Edward!” Ket himself talked with the herald on -the high ground near Bishop’s Gate. - -Negotiations ended abruptly. Some ill-mannered boy gave an indecent -and offensive salute to the herald, and was shot dead by an arrow from -the herald’s escort. At once the cry of “treachery” was raised by the -people, and all talk of peace was at an end. While the herald tried -to persuade Ket to come to the Earl of Warwick under a flag of truce, -the rebels gathered round their leader and besought him not to forsake -them. To Ket there could be sure reliance on royal promises of pardon, -and no surrender of the charge he had undertaken. His reply to the -herald was to retire on Mousehold and prepare for battle. - -Warwick at once entered the city, and began the business of -pacification by promptly hanging sixty men in the Market Place, -by Norwich Castle, “without hearing the cause”; and by issuing a -proclamation that all who were out of doors would receive similar -treatment. Then came a mishap, for the greater part of Warwick’s -artillery fell into Ket’s hands. The drivers of the gun-carriages, -entering the city after the soldiers, by St. Bennet’s Gate on the west, -and ignorant of the way, actually passed out at Bishop’s Gate on the -east on the very road towards Mousehold, and were quickly taken. Ket -had now the advantage in ordnance, and there was fighting in the city -all Sunday, August 25th. So uncertain was the issue that the burgesses -feared Warwick would suffer Northampton’s fate, and prayed him to -depart without further loss. But Warwick, waiting for reinforcements, -and knowing that 1,400 German mercenaries were close at hand, was not -the man to beat an ignominious retreat. - -The hireling “lanznechts” arrived next day, and on Tuesday, August -27th, came the fatal battle. - -Instead of remaining at Mousehold, where a strong resistance might have -been made, the rebels decided to march out boldly from their camp and -meet the king’s army in the open country that lay between Mousehold -Heath and the city. An old song was recalled, which, it seemed, -foretold victory in such a case: - - The country gnoffes (churls), Hob, Dick, and Rick, - With clubs and clouted shoon, - Shall fill the vale - Of Dussindale - With slaughtered bodies soon. - -But the country churls were to be the slaughtered, and not the -slaughterers. - -Warwick marched out by the north-east gate of St. Martin-at-the-Oak, -and for the last time a herald promised pardon to all who would -surrender. But the hangings in the market place had destroyed all -confidence in such proclamations, and the answer to the herald was that -they “perceived this pardon to be nothing else but a cask full of ropes -and halters.” - -Ket’s judgment failed him utterly on that last day of the rising. On -the strength of an irrelevant old song he allowed his army to go to its -doom unchecked, and at the very time when good generalship was wanted -above all other things, Robert Ket seems to have lost his nerve, and to -have been struck by some paralysis of the will, as though conscious of -impending ruin. - -The peasants poured down into the valley, and into the meadows beyond -Magdalen and Pockthorp Gates, and fought with desperate courage, -but they were simply cut to pieces by the professional soldiery. At -four o’clock in the afternoon it was all over, the defeat utter and -complete, and Robert Ket and his brother were in flight. - -The remains of the rebel army laid down their arms, when Warwick -himself offered pardon in the king’s name to those who would surrender. - -The rising was at an end. The foreign mercenaries of the crown had -triumphed over English peasants. Robert Ket was taken the same night -at Swannington, eight miles north of Norwich. He had ridden away from -the battle when the field was lost, but horse and rider were too tired -to proceed further. Taking refuge in a barn, he was recognized by some -men unloading a wagon of corn and seized. The farmer’s wife “rated him -for his conduct, but he only prayed her to be quiet, and to give him -meat.” That same night William Ket was taken, and the two brothers were -delivered to the lord lieutenant of the county, and by him carried to -London to be tried for their lives. - -At Mousehold Warwick proved the worth of the pardons he had given -by first having nine of the bravest of the peasants hanged, drawn, -and quartered under the Oak of Reformation, and distributing their -bodies in the city; and then by hanging 300 prisoners on trees, and -then forty-nine more at the Market Cross in Norwich. The country -gentlemen of Norfolk, backed by their wealthier citizens, called for -more executions, till Warwick turned with disgust from the vindictive -clamour of these bloodthirsty civilians, and pointed out in impatient -reproof that no one would be left “to plough and harrow over the lands” -if all the peasants were massacred. - -And now the king’s authority having been re-established, a public -service of thanksgiving was held in the church of St. Peter, Mancroft, -and August 27th was ordered to be observed henceforth as “Thanksgiving -Day” in Norwich. (This was done by prayers and sermon until 1667. -In the grammar school, during Elizabeth’s reign, an account of the -rising--_De Furoribus Norfolciensum_, written in Latin by Nevylle, and -violently anti-popular in expression--was ordered to be used as a text -book in place of the usual classics, and was so used for some years.) - -On September 7th Warwick returned to London.[103] In November Robert -and William Ket, after lying in the Tower for two months, were brought -to trial. They offered no defence for what they had done: for having -borne arms without the king’s permission, and for having striven to -stop the robbery and oppression of the peasant without the authority of -king and parliament. - -On November 26th they were found guilty of high treason, their property -confiscated, and they were condemned to death. On November 29th they -were delivered out of the custody of the Tower to the high sheriff of -Norfolk, and on December 1st the Kets were again in Norwich. - -It was winter, and hope was dead. The last great rising of the English -peasantry had failed, crushed without pity, and the leaders of the -army of revolt, who had judged it better to give up ease and worldly -honour rather than acquiesce dumbly in the enslavement of their -poorer neighbours, were to die as traitors.[104] On December 7th the -executions were carried out, and Robert Ket was hanged in chains -outside Norwich Castle, while William Ket was taken to Wymondham (where -he held the manor of Chossell--Church lands, bought years earlier from -the Earl of Warwick), and there hanged in chains from the parish church. - -The property of the Kets was duly taken by the servants of the crown, -and the bodies of the rebel leaders swung in the wind--to remind -unthinking men of the reward of rebellion, of the fate of all who -challenge, without success, the arms of government. - -The Norfolk Rising was the last great movement of the English people -in social revolt. Riots we have known even in our times, and mob -violence, but no such rising as those led by Wat Tyler, by Cade, and -by Ket has England seen since the year 1549. - -The country people sunk into hopeless poverty and permanent degradation -under Edward VI. and Elizabeth, and with the rejection by the -government of papal authority, the supremacy of the crown and of the -ministers of the crown was established. - -In the nineteenth century, when the working people in town and country -once more bestirred themselves at the call of freedom, their wiser -leaders advised political and not revolutionary methods of action, and -the advice has been followed. - -But if the year 1549 marks the end of organized democratic resistance -to intolerable misgovernment, the coming centuries were to see the rise -of the middle class with the insistent demand for the predominance of -that class in the parliament of the nation, and the incurable belief -that in a popularly elected House of Commons resided all the safeguards -of civil and religious liberty. - - - - -Eliot, Hampden, Pym, and the Supremacy of the Commons. - -1625–1643 - - -AUTHORITIES: S. R. Gardiner--_History of England_, _History of -Great Civil War_, _History of Commonwealth and Protectorate_; -Clarendon--_History of the Great Rebellion_;, John Forster--_Life -of Sir John Eliot_, _Life of Hampden_, _Life of Pym_, _The Grand -Remonstrance_, _Arrest of the Five Members_; Nugent--_Memorials for -Life of Hampden_; _Calendar of State Papers_; _House of Commons’ -Journals_. - -[Illustration: SIR JOHN ELIOT - -(_From a Steel Engraving by William Holl._)] - - - - -ELIOT, HAMPDEN, PYM, AND THE SUPREMACY OF THE COMMONS. - -1625–1643 - - -John Eliot, John Hampden, John Pym--by the work of these men comes the -supremacy of the House of Commons in the government of England. - -All three are country gentlemen of good estate, of high principle -and of some learning.[105] They are men of religious convictions, of -courage and resolution, and of blameless personal character. Two of -them--Eliot and Hampden--are content to die for the cause of good -government. - -The strong rule of Elizabeth left a difficult legacy of government to -James I. The despotism of the queen had been forgiven in the success -of her State policy; and if she had no high opinion of parliament, -Elizabeth had ministers who fairly represented the mind of the English -middle class. Elizabeth’s absolutism in Church and State was the direct -following of Henry VIII., and only at the very close of her reign was -it threatened by the discontent of parliament. With a shrewd instinct -for popularity Elizabeth at once yielded. Like her father, she saw the -importance of retaining parliament on the side of the crown and making -it the instrument of the royal will. There was no idea in the Tudor -mind of parliament sharing the government with the crown. The business -of the House of Commons of Elizabeth was to express its opinion and -then decree the proposals of the crown. “Liberty of speech was granted -in respect of the aye or no, but not that everybody should speak what -he listed.” (1592.) - -In religion Elizabeth had done her worst to exterminate the Roman -Catholic faith, and by the fierceness of her persecution had kindled -undying enthusiasm for the old beliefs and worship. But forty years -of repression did their work, and a generation arose which only -knew Catholicism as the faith of a proscribed and unpatriotic sect, -who denied the absolute sovereignty of the crown and had another -sovereign at Rome--the religion of Spain--popery, in short: a -faith worse than Mahomedanism or heathenism--the scarlet woman of -the Apocalypse--according to the fierce Puritan expounders of the -Bible, and not to be counted as Christianity. That this very Roman -Catholicism--so hateful because the penal laws kept it hidden and -unknown, and because it was the religion of Spain, then the national -enemy--had been the religion of all England for centuries, and that -under it the earliest charters of public liberty had been wrung -from the crown, and the principle of a representative parliament -established, were facts uncontemplated. - -But Elizabeth, while persecuting Roman Catholics, had left in the Book -of Common Prayer of the Church of England a sanction for ceremonial -and for episcopal ordination, and a body of doctrine which were to be -interpreted under the Stuarts by certain Anglican divines as witnesses -to Catholicism. Such interpretation was to be found in Elizabeth’s -reign as a pious opinion. With Laud it was an active principle, and -it brought him to the scaffold. The Elizabethan bishops in the main -were thoroughly Protestant, the queen was the head of the Church of -England, and the ritual of the Church prescribed by her was reduced to -a simplicity that average Protestants could accept. - -If Elizabeth burnt anabaptists and hanged other nonconformists, her -excuse was that the Church of England was sufficiently Protestant -to include all well-affected persons. The extreme Puritans whom she -persecuted had this in common with the Roman Catholics, that neither -accepted the absolute supremacy of the crown, and the best Puritan -teaching in England, even when it counselled conformity to the -Established Church, was creating a mind and temper that only found -expression in the Commonwealth. - -James I. came to the throne in 1603 prepared to carry on the Tudor -absolutism. He failed because he had neither Elizabeth’s ministers nor -her knowledge of the English country landowners. James never realised -that Spain was the popular enemy, that a discontent had suddenly grown -up in parliament in the last years of Elizabeth’s reign, and that the -English landowners--in many cases from their inherited possession of -the old Church lands--were generally bitterly hostile to the Roman -Catholic religion. James was tolerant in religion, and not inclined to -press Elizabeth’s penal laws against Roman Catholics, and this very -toleration brought him under the dislike of the country party. He -thought he could disregard the opinion of parliament and he found that -while a House of Commons submitted to a despotism when the country was -governed by a strong queen, it would not put up with the follies and -extravagance of the Duke of Buckingham. - -James died before the strength of the growing movement for -parliamentary government was seen. Charles who was no more tyrannical -than his father, but even more blind to the signs of the times, fell -before that parliamentary movement--a movement which outraged all -the traditions of Tudor government--and with his fall brought down -the throne, the House of Lords, and the Established Church. By his -inability to understand the House of Commons, by his support of the -Anglican movement towards Catholicism in the Church of England, and -by the mistakes of his ministers, Charles ripened the desire for -constitutional monarchy till the desire was irresistible. - -John Eliot gave forcible utterance to this desire, and died in prison -for his speech. John Pym carried on the work till the sword of civil -war was drawn. John Hampden, “the noblest type of parliamentary -opposition,” was content to back Pym as he had earlier backed Eliot, -and to die on Chalgrove Field. Brought up to regard as an alien creed -the old belief in papal supremacy in religion, unable to accept the new -doctrine of the Church of England that the king was supreme by divine -right (a doctrine begotten by the Tudors and dying with the Stuarts), -Eliot, Hampden, and Pym were all of the same Puritan type which found -its authority in the individual conscience. - -Eliot was less afflicted than his colleagues by the theological -Protestantism of the age.[106] First and last he was the -straightforward country gentleman, with exalted views on the sacred -responsibility of civil government, and a high standard of personal -honour. For Eliot there was no nobler sphere of work for an Englishman -than the House of Commons, and his example has not been without -followers. Seneca and Cicero are on his lips, as the later Puritans -had the Bible on theirs, and his eloquence marks the beginning of -parliamentary oratory. With a strong and clear view of constitutional -government, Eliot was no republican; he held to the notion that the -king must depend on the decisions of parliament. Time was to show that -this notion, in the event of a collision between king and parliament, -was to make parliament the predominant partner. - -On his first entry into the House of Commons as member for St. Germans, -in 1614, Eliot was the friend of Buckingham--whom he had met as a youth -abroad--and on Buckingham’s rise to the lord high admiralship Eliot was -knighted and became vice-admiral of Devon. - -The fidelity of his service to the State as vice-admiral brought an -unpleasant experience of the will of princes. Grappling with the -scourge of piracy which afflicted the seaports and shipping trade -of the West of England, Eliot accomplished the arrest of Nutt, a -notorious sea-robber. But Nutt had friends in high places, and Eliot -found himself lodged in the Marshalsea prison over the business. He was -released on Buckingham’s return from the continent, for the charges -were absurd, and in 1624 returned to the House of Commons as member for -Newport. Two years later Eliot was estranged from Buckingham--convinced -that the favourite of the king was an evil counsellor--and had become -the recognized leader of the House of Commons. Once assured in his -mind that Buckingham was responsible for the policy of the king, -Eliot became his implacable opponent. For the policy of the crown in -not making war upon Spain, in relaxing the penal laws against Roman -Catholics, and for the mismanagement of the war on the continent in -support of the Protestants, Eliot held Buckingham responsible. In -answer to the demand of Charles for money in 1626, Eliot insisted -that an inquiry into past disasters should precede supply, and that -Buckingham should be impeached. Not the king but his minister is to -blame, Eliot maintained, for all that was wrong in the State, and -this very speech strikes the note of the campaign that was beginning. -Buckingham was not responsible to Charles alone, in the eyes of Eliot -and his friends, but also to parliament.[107] - -Charles, quite unable to fathom the depth of the parliamentary -discontent, or to note the strength of the current against absolutism, -fell back upon the old Tudor doctrine of sovereignty, the doctrine of -the high Anglican party in the Church of England, that the king was -responsible for his acts to God alone. “Parliaments are altogether in -my calling,” he replies to the House of Commons. - -Only twenty-five years had passed since Bacon had declared, “the Queen -hath both enlarging and restraining power: she may set at liberty -things restrained by Statute, and may restrain things which be at -liberty.” Twenty-three years more were to see monarchy abolished and -the king beheaded. Eliot, standing midway between Bacon and Bradshaw, -cleaves to the theory of constitutional government and persists in the -impeachment of a minister in whom parliament had no confidence. - -The prologue of impeachment declared in the plainest language the -responsibility of the king’s ministers to parliament, and the -responsibility of parliament to the nation: “The laws of England -have taught us that kings cannot command ill or unlawful things, and -whatsoever ill event succeed, the executioners of such designs must -answer for them.” - -And now the issue was fairly set, and the battle begun between Charles -and the House of Commons. In that year, 1626, no man in England could -foretell the result. - -Charles, ill-advised to the end, believed he could overawe the Commons -by a display of might, and was beaten. Twice he had Eliot arrested -before the final imprisonment which ended Eliot’s life. - -The loyalty of the House of Commons to its leader compelled Charles -to release Eliot, after sending him to the Tower for his attack on -Buckingham. Then dissolving parliament in June, 1626, and falling back -on a forced loan, the king was met by wide refusals, and Eliot, with -Hampden and others, suffered imprisonment over this. Eliot was also -deprived of his vice-admiralship and struck off the roll of justices of -the peace. - -Driven to call a parliament for the third time in 1628, the king was -faced by a stronger opposition than ever. - -Eliot, now member for Cornwall, throughout the session continued the -attack on arbitrary taxation, and with the lawyers Seldon and Coke -carried the Petition of Right to stop the illegal imprisonments, the -enforced billeting of soldiers, and forced loans. Buckingham, slain -at Portsmouth, no longer troubled the commonwealth; but Wentworth, -ambitious to use his powers in the service of the government, had left -the popular side for the king; while Laud, and Weston, the chancellor -of the exchequer, were daily preaching to Charles the divine right of -kings and to his subjects the duty of passive obedience. - -The following year both Eliot and Pym attacked the ecclesiastical -policy of Laud. To them the established religion of England, settled -on the Protestant basis by Elizabeth, was being definitely changed -in a Catholic direction without the sanction of parliament, and in -the very teeth of the opposition of the House of Commons. High-church -clergymen, like Montague and Mainwaring, holding to the full a Catholic -interpretation of the Book of Common Prayer, were only censured by the -House of Commons to be promoted by the crown. Laud preaching a royal -supremacy undreamt of by the great archbishops before Henry VIII., -combined with it a doctrine of ecclesiastical independence, owning no -allegiance to Rome, equally novel. - -Eliot, stoical in his beliefs, and Pym, whose Calvinism was tempered -by common sense, regarded with horror the revival in the Church of -England of Catholic doctrines concerning the sacraments and the -priesthood. They had done what they could to check any indulgence to -Roman Catholics in England, and it was monstrous to them that the -Church of England, whose formularies and ritual had been defined by -parliament for the maintenance of Protestantism, should be expanded to -reintroduce doctrines and practices essentially Catholic. But for the -time the House of Commons was powerless in the matter, and only sixteen -years later was Laud to expiate on the scaffold his Anglo-Catholicism, -dying a veritable martyr for the high Anglican doctrine. “None have -gone about to break parliaments but in the end parliaments have broken -them,” declared Eliot on March 2nd, 1629, and Laud, no less than -Charles and Wentworth, was to prove the truth of the warning. - -If parliament could do nothing in that year, 1629, to stop Laud’s -policy, it could at least defend the privileges of its members. The -goods of John Rolle, M.P., had been seized by the king’s officers -because their owner had refused to pay tonnage and poundage on demand, -and at once Eliot was up in arms in defence of the privileges of his -fellow member, whose liberties had been interfered with. - -Pym was for a wider view of the matter--objecting to the question -being narrowed down to a breach of privilege. “The liberties of this -House,” he argued, “are inferior to the liberties of this kingdom. To -determine the privilege of this House is but a mean matter, and the -main end is to establish possession of the subjects, and to take off -the commission and records and orders that are against us.” With Pym it -was not Rolle, the member, who had been ill-used, but Rolle the British -subject, and it was for the liberties of the subject he strove, holding -the freedom of parliament as but a means to that end. - -Eliot, a House of Commons man, through and through, saw in the welfare -of parliament the welfare of the nation, and stuck to his point, -carrying the House with him, that the privileges of a member extended -to his goods. To this Charles sent word that what had been done had -been done by his authority. The only question now was, how long would -it be before the king dissolved parliament. - -On the second of March, when the House met, the speaker’s first -word was that the king had ordered an adjournment till the tenth, -and that no business could be transacted. Eliot insisted on moving -his resolutions, and the speaker was held down in his chair. Then -the serjeant-at-arms attempted to remove the mace, and was promptly -stopped, while the key of the House was turned from within. - -Eliot moved his declaration, beginning with the famous words: “By the -ancient laws and liberties of England, it is the known birthright and -inheritance of the subject, that no tax, tallage, or other charge shall -be levied or imposed but by common consent in England; and that the -subsidies of tonnage and poundage are no way due or payable but by a -free gift and special act of parliament.” - -The resolutions were carried with loud shouts of assent, two members -guarding the speaker, and the door was flung open; the sitting was over. - -A royal proclamation for dissolving parliament followed on the fourth -of March, and Eliot, with eight other members, was summoned to appear -before the Privy Council. - -From the hour of that summons John Eliot’s liberty was over, and not -for eleven years was England to have another parliament. - -For the fourth time Eliot was a prisoner. He declined altogether to -give an account of what he had said in parliament, or to acknowledge -any right of interference with the proceedings in parliament. To the -crown lawyers his reply was to stand on the privileges of a member of -the House of Commons. “I refuse to answer,” he said, “because I hold -that it is against the privilege of parliament to speak of anything -which is done in the House.” He insisted that he was accountable to -the House alone, and that no other power existed with a constitutional -right to inquire into his conduct there. - -At the end of October Eliot was removed from the Tower to the -Marshalsea, and then in January, 1630, he was charged in the King’s -Bench with two other members, Holles and Valentine, with conspiring to -resist the king’s lawful order, to calumniate ministers of the crown, -and to assault the speaker. Again Eliot refused to acknowledge the -jurisdiction. He was fined £2,000, and sent back to the Tower. - -To the last Eliot’s loyalty to the House of Commons remained unshaken. -He had but to acknowledge that he had done wrong, to admit that he had -offended, and the prison doors would have opened to him. But to make -this acknowledgment was to deny the sacred liberty of parliament, -to admit wrong was to betray the House of Commons. To John Eliot the -welfare of the House of Commons was a national cause--dearer than life. -To betray its honour was to betray the State. The loyalty of John Eliot -to the House of Commons was interwoven with his devotion to the State, -but it was something England had never seen before, and never saw -again. “He learned to believe, as no other man believed before or after -him, in the representatives of the nation.” (Gardiner.) - -The character and temperament of Eliot must be taken into account -in understanding this passionate belief in the House of Commons. It -was not as a great thinker but as a great orator he had risen to the -leadership of the House of Commons. He saw in his mind, as no other man -saw at the time, a perfectly balanced constitution of king, lords, and -commons. In parliament was the best wisdom of the country placed at the -service of the crown. In the crown was the appointed ruler who, with -his ministers, had but to come to parliament for advice and counsel. -So it seemed to John Eliot; and single-minded himself, he could not -realise that in the House of Commons were plenty of men of but passing -honesty, and that Charles and Laud and Wentworth were fundamentally -opposed to his views of constitutional government, and bitterly hostile -to the growing powers of the commons.[108] - -[Illustration: JOHN PYM - -(_From an Engraving by Jacob Houbraken._)] - -Months passed, and John Eliot’s health gave way in the confinement in -the Tower, but his steadfastness was unchanged. He corresponded with -his friend John Hampden, wrote his treatise on the _Monarchy of Man_, -and calmly awaited his end. An application on behalf of his friends -and his son for Eliot’s release was made in October, 1622, on the -ground that “the doctors were of opinion he could never recover of his -consumption until such time as he might breathe in purer air.” The -reply of Chief Justice Richardson was “that, although Sir John were -brought low in body, yet was he as high and lofty in mind as ever; for -he would neither submit to the king nor to the justice of that court.” - -On November 27th, 1632, the spirit of John Eliot, unbroken by -captivity, passed from the body his gaolers had deprived of life. A -last appeal from his son to the king for the removal of his father’s -body into Cornwall, there to lie with those of his ancestors at Port -Eliot, received the curt refusal, “Let Sir John Eliot’s body be buried -in the church of the parish where he died.” And so he was buried in the -Tower, and no stone marks the spot where he lies. - -John Eliot was but forty-two when he laid down his life for the -principle of parliamentary government. - -Any satisfaction that might have been felt by Charles and Laud at the -death of the foremost antagonist to their policy of absolutism was -fleeting. For if Eliot was dead, the cause he had championed with such -conspicuous sincerity and courage was alive, and John Hampden and John -Pym were at hand to carry on the fight till Cromwell and his Ironsides -were ready to end the battle. - -Charles was determined that, until the commons should be more -submissive, he would call no parliament, but would govern through his -ministers alone. The difficulty was to find money. - -In 1634 London and the seaports were persuaded to furnish supplies -for ships on the pretext that piracy must be prevented. A year later -and the demand was extended to the inland counties, and John Hampden, -taking his stand on the Petition of Right which Charles had granted -in 1628, declined to pay. Ten out of twelve of the king’s judges had -decided that ship-money might be enforced if the kingdom appeared to -be in danger, but against this declared legality there was the decree -of parliament forbidding forced loans or taxes without parliamentary -sanction. - -On this resistance of the ship-money Hampden’s fame has been chiefly -built up. The amount was small--only a matter of some twenty -shillings--the issue was of a first importance. It was clear to Hampden -that if the king could raise money by such methods, what need would -there be in the royal mind for the calling of parliament at all? The -question was forced upon him: Was parliament an essential part of the -constitution? The judges had declared ship-money was legal, other -taxation and forced loans could easily find justification on the -judicial bench, and thus the crown obtain its revenue, and England -ruled without any let or hindrance from its citizens. To admit the -position was to see the work of centuries undone, and the old contest -in the land for liberties in return for taxes abandoned. - -Hampden’s refusal to pay ship-money was a declaration for parliamentary -government. No more a republican than Eliot or Pym, Hampden could see -that either crown or parliament must be supreme in the affairs of -the nation.[109] The constitution was not to be balanced so evenly -as Eliot had believed. Eliot himself had been deprived of life for -maintaining, not the supremacy but the liberty of parliament. For John -Hampden the evils of royal supremacy were obvious and present: misrule, -the restoration of a religion banished by authority of crown and -parliament, and disliked and feared by the majority of serious-minded -people in the country, and the imprisonment of all who claimed the old -freedom of parliament. - -The case was decided against him in the law courts, but five of the -twelve judges supported Hampden’s contention that the resistance to -payment was valid, and the arguments for his defence were published -far and wide. “The judgment proved of more advantage and credit to the -gentleman condemned than to the king’s service.”[110] - -Three years later, and Charles was forced to summon parliament to get -money for his war in Scotland--the “Bishop’s War,” perhaps the most -hopeless of all his ventures. - -Parliament met in April, and its temper was so unfavourable to the -desires of the king, for the forcible conversion of the Scots to -episcopacy, that it was dissolved in three weeks. John Pym was notable -in that “Short Parliament” as the spokesman of the aggrieved country -party, and the commons decided that the grievances of the nation -must be considered before supplies were voted. The Scotch war was -intolerable to Pym and Hampden. They had no objection to episcopacy as -long as bishops were men of Protestant convictions. It was Laud the -“Anglo-Catholic,” Laud the preacher of the divine right of kings, not -Laud the Archbishop of Canterbury, whom they detested, and they had no -relish for the expenditure of English life and treasure in the forcing -of Laudian doctrine on Protestant Scotland. - -In the long eleven years of silence from the utterance of parliament -things had been going steadily from bad to worse in England, Pym -made out. Naturally conservative in mind, seeing in the constitution -of king and parliament an admirable instrument of government, and -in the Established Church of England an excellent expression of the -Protestant religion, Pym had found that with parliament suspended the -Protestantism of the Established Church had been steadily undermined by -Laud’s policy, and the revival of some estranged Catholic doctrines and -practices had proceeded apace. Without parliament there was no security -for national well-being. “Powers of parliament are to the body politic -as rational faculties of the soul to man,” he declares in April, 1640. - -Pym had entered the House of Commons with Eliot in 1614, and had -been imprisoned in that year for his boldness. In 1620 he had been -one of the “twelve ambassadors” to James I., for whom that king had -ordered chairs to be set in Whitehall. With Eliot and Hampden he -had pressed for Buckingham’s impeachment and for the Petition of -Right. Now in 1640, John Pym, in his fifty-sixth year, was about to -become the accredited leader of the parliamentary party, to be called -“King Pym” by his enemies at the court, and to pass away when the -long constitutional struggle was being settled on the field of civil -war. Unimaginative, and averse from new ideas, Pym had a quite clear -perception of the business of the House of Commons, and of the fitting -relations of king and parliament. The crown, the lords, the commons -were all recognized and necessary elements in the constitution, but -their importance was not equal. The collective assembly of parliament -had prevailed over the crown more than once; to Pym, the Laudian -“divine right” was a novelty, and nonsense at that. Parliament could do -much of its work with or without royal approval, and of the two Houses, -if the Lords were unwilling to work with the lower House, the Commons -could “save the kingdom alone.” - -In the autumn Charles was driven again to appeal to parliament, and -in November, 1640, the “Long Parliament” met, only to be dissolved -thirteen years later by the arms of Cromwell. To the eleven years -of “personal government” by Charles succeed thirteen years of -parliamentary government, and then the House of Commons, now too -enfeebled to endure, itself goes down before a military dictatorship. - -Pym anticipated the coming struggle by riding over England on the eve -of the elections to the Long Parliament and urging the electors to -return men to the House of Commons resolute and alive to the crisis. -The response was unmistakable. Parliament assembled to find some remedy -for the distresses of the country before voting any money for the -purposes of the crown. Enormous numbers of petitions were presented, -and the House of Commons appointed its committees to attend to and -report on the complaints.[111] - -Before the year closed the House of Commons had struck at the power of -Laud and Wentworth (now the Earl of Strafford), and the two ministers -lay in prison impeached for high treason. Windebank, Charles’s -secretary of state, and Finch, the chancellor, were already fled over -seas. - -It was Pym who went to the bar of the House of Lords to summon -Strafford to surrender, and it was Pym who opened the charge of -impeachment the following March. As in Eliot’s time, Hampden is content -to be overshadowed by his friend, though his was the greater influence -in the House. - -Clarendon has given us his view of Hampden at the opening of the Long -Parliament: - - When this parliament began the eyes of all men were fixed upon - him, as their _patriae pater_, and the pilot that must steer - the vessel through the tempests and rocks which threatened it. - I am persuaded his power and interest at that time were greater - to do good or hurt than any man’s in the kingdom, or than any - man of his rank hath had in any time; for his reputation of - honesty was universal, and his affections seemed so publicly - guided, that no corrupt or private ends could bias them. - -Baxter, it may be recalled, had written in the _Saints’ Rest_ that -one of the pleasures which he hoped to enjoy in heaven was the society -of John Hampden. The name of Hampden was blotted out in the copies -published after the Restoration. “But,” wrote Baxter, “I must tell -the reader that I did blot it out, not as changing my opinion of the -person.” - -The work of Pym and Hampden is conspicuous at the beginning of the Long -Parliament. The Star Chamber and High Commission Courts are abolished. -Ship-money and all enforced taxation unauthorised by parliament are -declared illegal. Oliver Cromwell’s motion for annual parliaments is -amended into an act for triennial parliaments to be called with or -without royal summons. Strafford--the only strong minister Charles -had--perished on Tower Hill in May, both Pym and Hampden supporting -impeachment instead of attainder, and voting for the fallen minister -to be allowed the use of counsel at his trial. That Strafford was a -criminal and a traitor ready to use his Irish army for the suppression -of the English parliament Pym had no doubt. - -Still Charles would not admit the position lost, and still struggled -to govern, not through parliament, but by personal rule. The death of -Strafford, though approved by all supporters of the House of Commons, -rallied the king’s friends. The House of Lords was no longer quite at -one with the Commons in the contest. In the House of Commons a royalist -party emerges to oppose Pym, and the beginning of party government -is seen. Overtures are made by Pym to the queen--to be disregarded, -of course; though the tide is setting towards revolution, yet Pym -and Hampden are far from revolutionaries. They are willing to end -the political power of the bishops by turning them out of the House -of Lords, but have only moderate sympathy with the root-and-branch -Puritans who would abolish episcopacy. - -In the Grand Remonstrance which Pym laid before the House of Commons in -November, 1641, the case for the Parliament was stated with frankness, -but the demands were not revolutionary. The main points were securities -for the administration of justice, and insistence on the responsibility -of the king’s ministers to parliament. The royalists fought the -Remonstrance vigorously, and in the end it was only carried by a -majority of eleven, 159 to 148. At the end of the debate the excitement -was intense: “some waved their hats over their heads, and others took -their swords in their scabbards out of their belts, and held them by -the pummels in their hands, setting the lower part on the ground.” -Violence seemed inevitable, “had not the sagacity and great calmness of -Mr. Hampden, by a short speech, prevented it.” - -On the 1st of December the Remonstrance, with a petition for the -removal of grievances, especially in matters of religion, was presented -to the king at Hampton Court. “Charles had now a last chance of -regaining the affection of his people. If he could have resolved to -give his confidence to the leaders of the moderate party in the House -of Commons, and to regulate his proceedings by their advice, he might -have been, not, indeed, as he had been, a despot, but the powerful and -respected king of a free people. The nation might have enjoyed liberty -and repose under a government with Falkland at its head, checked by -a constitutional opposition under the conduct of Hampden. It was -not necessary that, in order to accomplish this happy end, the king -should sacrifice any part of his lawful prerogative, or submit to any -conditions inconsistent with his dignity.” So Macaulay wrote. But the -days of “governments” and “constitutional oppositions” were far off in -1641, and only the germ of party government is seen in the division of -the House of Commons. To “submit to any conditions” from parliament was -inconsistent with the king’s notions of royal dignity, fostered by Laud -to reject all criticisms as denials of the absolutism of the crown. - -Charles promised an answer to the deputation which waited on him, -and the answer was seen on January 3, 1642, when the king’s attorney -appeared at the bar of the Lords, impeached Pym, Hampden, Holles, -Strode, and Hazlerig of high treason, in having corresponded with the -Scots for the invasion of England, and demanded the surrender of the -five members. “All constitutional law was set aside by a charge which -proceeded personally from the king, which deprived the accused of their -legal right to a trial by their peers, and summoned them before a -tribunal which had no pretence to a jurisdiction over them.” - -The House of Commons simply declined to surrender their members, but -promised to take the matter into consideration. - -Then Charles, with some three hundred cavaliers, went to Westminster, -and entered the House of Commons to demand the accused. But the five -members, warned of his coming, were out of the way and safe within the -city of London. “It was believed that if the king had found them there, -and called in his guards to have seized them, the members of the House -would have endeavoured the defence of them, which might have proved a -very unhappy and sad business.” As it was, the king could only retire -discomfited, with some words about respecting the laws of the realm and -the privileges of parliament, and “in a more discontented and angry -passion than he came in.” - -The invasion of the Commons was the worst move Charles could have made, -for parliament was in no temper favourable to royal encroachments, and -it had a large population at hand ready to give substantial support. -The city of London at once declared for the House of Commons, ignored -the king’s writs for the arrest of the five members, and answered the -royal proclamation declaring them “traitors” by calling out the trained -bands for the escort of the members back to Westminster, and for the -protection of the House of Commons. - -Falkland and the royalist members turned for the moment from Charles at -his unexpected attack on the House, the cavaliers of Whitehall, menaced -by the trained bands from Southwark and the city, fled, and Charles, -standing alone, left London. - -War was now imminent. Pym and Hampden at once prepared for the struggle. - -Pym secured the arsenals of Portsmouth and Hull for the parliament, -but his efforts to obtain the control of the militia in the counties -were frustrated for a time by the king’s natural refusal to consent to -the Militia Bill, which would have placed troops under the orders of -country gentlemen of the parliamentary party. - -Both king and parliament had to break through all constitutional -precedent. The king levied troops by a royal commission, and Pym -got an ordinance of both Houses of Parliament passed appointing the -lords-lieutenant to command the militia, and thereby published the -supremacy of parliament over the crown. In April the king appeared at -Hull to obtain arms, and was refused admission to the town by Sir John -Hotham, the governor. Parliament expressed its approval of Hotham’s -act, the royalists gathered round Charles at York, and the final -proposals of parliament for ending absolute monarchy were rejected by -the king in June with the words, “If I granted your demands I should be -no more than the mere phantom of a king.”[112] - -With this refusal all negotiations were broken off. Essex was appointed -commander of the parliamentary army, and in August Charles raised the -royal standard at Nottingham, and war was begun. - -Hampden threw himself vigorously into the campaign. From his native -county of Buckingham, the county which made him its representative in -parliament in 1640, he raised a regiment of infantry. “His neighbours -eagerly enlisted under his command. His men were known by their green -uniform, and by their standard, which bore on one side the watchword -of the parliament, ‘God with us,’ and on the other the device of -Hampden, ‘_Vestigia nulla retrorsum_.’” In the first stages of the war, -before any decisive blow had been struck, Hampden was busy passing and -repassing between the army and the parliament. Clarendon praises his -courage and ability on the field. - -A skirmish at Chalgrove, on June 18th, 1643, between bodies of horse -commanded by Rupert and by Hampden, ended in victory for the royalists. -Hampden was seen riding off the field, “before the action was done, -which he never used to do, and with his head hanging down, and resting -his hands upon the neck of his horse.” He was mortally wounded, for two -carbine balls were lodged in his shoulder, and reached Thame only to -die six days later. - -The death of Hampden--at the age of 49--came at a dark hour in the -early fortunes of the parliamentary army, and deepened the gloom. -“The loss of Colonel Hampden goeth near the heart of every man that -loves the good of his king and country, and makes some conceive little -content to be at the army now that he is gone.” But Pym remained, and -Cromwell and Vane, and many another resolute House of Commons man. - -Pym’s health was already broken when Hampden fell, but he lived to -accomplish the alliance of the English Puritans and the Scotch army, -and, as the price of this alliance, the abolition of episcopacy and -the adoption of Presbyterianism in the Church of England. The Solemn -League and Covenant was accepted by parliament, and imposed on the -nation in September. Henceforth the parliamentary army was pledged to -extirpate “Popery, prelacy, superstition, schism and profaneness”; -to bring “the Churches of God in the three kingdoms to the nearest -conjunction and uniformity in religion”; to “preserve the rights and -privileges of the parliament and the liberties of the kingdom; and to -unite the two kingdoms in a firm peace and union to all posterity.” - -The taking of the covenant--a political necessity--was John Pym’s -last work. He was ten years older than Hampden, and his character -was ruggeder and sterner and without the charm of the younger man. -But Pym’s was the greater genius in politics, and his scheme of -constitutional government was to be fulfilled in England at a later -season. - -John Pym died on December 8th, 1643, and his body was buried in -Westminster Abbey--only to be turned out at the Restoration and removed -to St. Margaret’s churchyard. - -With Pym and Hampden gone, henceforth the conduct of parliament was in -other hands, and the day of moderate statesmanship had passed. - -The war undertaken to preserve the liberties and establish the -supremacy of the House of Commons was to bring in its train not only -the abolition of monarchy and the House of Lords, but the suppression -of the House of Commons itself. - -Important to the nation as the issues at stake were, most people in -England took hardly any more part or interest in the great civil war -than they had done in the Wars of the Roses. “A very large number of -persons regarded the struggle with indifference.... In one case, the -inhabitants of an entire county pledged themselves to remain neutral. -Many quietly changed with the times (as people changed with the varying -fortunes of York and Lancaster). That this sentiment of neutrality -was common to the greater mass of the working classes is obvious from -the simultaneous appearance of the club men in different parts of the -country, with their motto, ‘If you take our cattle, we will give you -battle.’”[113] - -How could it be otherwise? Supremacy of King, or supremacy of -Commons,--seed time and harvest remain, and the labourer and the -artizan must needs do their day’s work. - -Not till the deposing of the Stuarts--forty-five years after John -Hampden’s death--is the supremacy of parliament over the crown arrived -at by general consent, to become a recognized and settled thing in -British politics. By the middle of the nineteenth century the House of -Commons is unmistakably the ruling power in the constitution, and the -labours of Eliot, Hampden and Pym are vindicated. - -In our own day changes in the balance of constitutional power may be -noted. The supremacy of the House of Commons is quietly disappearing -before the growing popularity of the crown, the reawakened activity of -the House of Lords, and the steady gathering of the reins of power into -the hands of the Cabinet and Executive. As the crown in the last twenty -years has increased in popular esteem, so the influence and importance -of the Commons has waned in the country; and this waning influence of -the Lower House has been further diminished by the frequent rejection -and revision of its measures by the House of Lords. - -The power of the Executive has also been obtained at the expense of the -power of the Commons. The Cabinet, rather than the House of Commons, -holds the supremacy to-day, and the direction of foreign policy, and -the making of international treaties are no more within the authority -of the House of Commons than are the administration of Egypt and India. -Pym and Hampden fought and gave their lives for the right of the House -of Commons to control the ministers of the crown and to order the -policy of these ministers. By its own consent, and not from pressure -from without, the House of Commons has silently surrendered this right, -and has agreed that the policy of its Foreign Minister for the time -being--whether he be Liberal or Conservative--must not be subject to -reproof, still less to correction. In home affairs administrative order -steadily supersedes statute law. - -In theory ministers are still subject to the House of Commons. In -actual practice they can rely on not being interfered with as long as -their party has a majority in the House. When the price of effective -interference with the conduct of affairs is a defeat of the Cabinet -and a consequent dissolution, the payment is more than members of -parliament are prepared to make. - -Given the sense of security of social order and of the administration -of justice, the nation, generally, no more heeds the passing of the -supremacy from the House of Commons, than it heeded the winning of -that supremacy. - -The Laudian doctrine in the Church of England, revived at the -Restoration, disappeared with the passing of the non-jurors at the -close of the seventeenth century. But its Anglo-Catholic teaching was -renewed by the Oxford Movement, early in Queen Victoria’s reign, and -has largely changed the whole appearance of the Church of England. The -modern high Anglican, claiming, as Laud claimed, the right to interpret -the Book of Common Prayer as a Catholic document, but no longer the -advocate of any theory of divine right of kings, or the champion of any -particular political creed, has travelled indeed far beyond Laud’s very -limited success in winning support for Catholic doctrine and ritual in -the Church of England. Laud was beaten by the opposition of parliament; -his present day successors in the Church of England have prospered in -spite of that opposition, and have triumphed over acts of parliaments, -adverse judicial sentences, privations and imprisonments. But with Laud -the movement was directed by bishops and approved by the king, the -modern Laudian movement was banned by bishops and disfavoured by all in -high authority. - -To-day nearly every Catholic doctrine, save papal supremacy, has its -expounders and defenders in the Church of England, and Catholic rites -and ceremonies are freely practised. - -Laud, dying on the scaffold in 1645 at the hands of parliament, -is amply avenged in the twentieth century by the victorious -high-churchman. The Laudian clergy of the Established Church can now -maintain their Anglo-Catholic faith and practice, without any fear -of parliamentary interference. For generally they enjoy a popularity -and respect that the House of Commons does not willingly venture to -assail. - - - - -John Lilburne and the Levellers - -1647–1653 - - -AUTHORITIES: Lilburne’s Pamphlets; _Calendar of State Papers_; _Charles -I. and the Commonwealth_; _State Trials_; _House of Commons’ Journals_; -Whitelocke--_Memorials of English Affairs_; Clarendon--_History -of the Rebellion_; W. Godwin--_History of the Commonwealth_; S. -R. Gardiner--_History of the Great Civil War_; _History of the -Commonwealth and Protectorate_; G. P. Gooch--_History of Democratic -Ideas in the Seventeenth Century_. - - - - -JOHN LILBURNE AND THE LEVELLERS - -1647–1653. - - -From his coming of age in 1637 till the near approach of death, when he -turned, a dying man, to the peaceful tenets of the Quakers, the life of -John Lilburne is a record of twenty years of strife and battle with the -rulers of the land. - -He came of pugnacious stock, for John Lilburne’s father, a well-to-do -Durham squire, was the last man to demand the settlement of a lawsuit -by the ordeal of battle, and came into court armed accordingly--only -to be disappointed by an order from the crown, forbidding the proposed -return to such ancient and obsolete methods of deciding the differences -of neighbours. - -Apprenticed to a wholesale cloth-merchant in London, John Lilburne -soon became acquainted with Bastwick and Prynne, then busy over -anti-episcopal pamphlets, and, keeping such company, naturally fell -into the clutches of the Star Chamber. The charge against him was that -he had helped to print and circulate unlicensed books, in particular, -Prynne’s _News from Ipswich_; and though Lilburne declared the charge -to be false, on his refusal to take the usual oath to answer truly all -questions put to him, the Star Chamber adjudged him guilty, and passed -sentence--Lilburne was to be whipped from the Fleet to Westminster, to -stand in the pillory, and to be kept in prison. - -The sentence was carried out on February 13th, 1638, but Lilburne was -not cowed, for he scattered some of Bastwick’s offending pamphlets -on the road, and was gagged in the pillory to reduce him to silence. -In prison things went hardly with Lilburne, for the authorities had -him placed in irons and kept in solitary confinement, and only the -compassion of fellow prisoners saved him from actual starvation in the -two years and nine months of his imprisonment. - -It was a rough beginning, and John Lilburne was henceforth an agitator -and a rebel. - -At the end of 1640 one of the first things done by the Long Parliament -was to order Lilburne’s release, and in the following May the sentence -was pronounced “illegal and against the liberties of the subject.” But -illegal or not, the punishment had been inflicted, and with unbroken -spirit, passionately resenting the tyranny that could so wrong men, -Lilburne flew quickly to the attack on the authors of the injustice. - -At Edgehill Lilburne held a captain’s commission, and at Brentford he -was taken prisoner by the royalists. Only the threat of swift reprisals -by the parliamentary army saved him from being shot as “a traitor,” and -the following year he was again at liberty on an exchange of prisoners. -Again, after fighting at Marston Moor, he fell into the hands of the -royalists, and, shot through the arm, was kept in prison at Oxford for -six months. - -Brave soldier as Lilburne was, he left the army in 1645 (with the rank -of Lieutenant-Colonel and with £880 arrears of pay owing to him) -rather than take the covenant and subscribe to the requirements of -Cromwell’s “new model.” - -And now monarchy having fallen from its high estate, Lilburne at once -saw elements of tyranny in the Parliamentary government, and did not -hesitate to say so. Courageous and intrepid, with considerable legal -knowledge, a passion for liberty, and clear views on democracy, John -Lilburne might have given invaluable service to the commonwealth. He -had shown skill and daring in the war, his character for fearless -endurance had been proved, his ability as a pamphleteer was -considerable, and his capacity for work enormous; the government had -either to treat Lilburne as a friend or foe--he was not to be ignored. -The government, unwisely, decided Lilburne was an enemy, and for the -next ten years he fought the rule of parliament and the army, his -popularity increasing with every new pamphlet he produced. The price -the commonwealth government paid for its opposition to Lilburne was to -be seen on the death of Cromwell.[114] - -From 1645 to 1649 Lilburne’s vigorous criticisms of the men in power -provoked retaliation, and brought him to Newgate. But in prison or out -of prison Lilburne went on hammering away to establish a democratic -constitution. The time was to come when Cromwell would find the Long -Parliament had outlived its usefulness and would end it by main force. -Lilburne was anxious in 1647 for a radical reform of parliament and a -general manhood suffrage. His proposals were popular in the army, and -had Cromwell supported him the whole future of English politics would -have been changed. - -When the Presbyterian majority in parliament proposed the disbandment -of the army in 1647, the regiments chose their agitators, and, refusing -to disband, drew up the “Agreement of the People” and the “Case for the -Army.” These documents give the political standpoint of the Levellers -and the particular grievances to be remedied. - -The distribution of parliamentary seats according to the number of -inhabitants was the chief proposal in the “Agreement of the People,” -and the principles maintained are that “no man is bound to a government -under which he has not put himself,” and that “all inhabitants who have -not lost their birthright should have an equal voice in elections.” - -The particular demands in the “Case for the Army” were the abolition -of monopolies, freedom of trade and religion, restoration of enclosed -common lands, and abolition of sinecures. - -While Cromwell and Ireton were both bitterly against manhood suffrage, -the council of officers to whom the Levellers appealed agreed to -support it, without approving the rest of the programme. - -Cromwell, relying on the army to prevent a royalist reaction--for -Charles was plotting from Carisbrooke for aid from Scotland, and -the royalists in the House of Commons were anxious to effect a -reconciliation--would give neither time nor patience to the demands of -Lilburne and the Levellers. - -In vain the Levellers exclaimed, in 1648, “We were ruled before -by King, Lords, and Commons, now by a General, Court Martial, and -Commons: and, we pray you, what is the difference?” Cromwell, at all -costs, was determined to preserve the discipline of the army, and to -suppress mutiny with an iron hand. For him the army which had beaten -the cavaliers was the one safeguard against the return of the old -order in Church and State. Lilburne and the Levellers, with the “Fifth -Monarchy” men, had been the strength, the very life of the army that -had conquered at Marston Moor and Naseby. The petition of the Fifth -Monarchy men for the reign of Christ and His saints (which, according -to prophecy, was to supersede the four monarchies of the ancient -world) had no terrors for Cromwell; in other words, they demanded -government exclusively by the godly, Independents and Presbyterians -combining to elect all representatives, “and to determine all things -by the Word.” “Such a proposal might attract fanatics; it could not -attract the multitude. The Levellers who stood up for an exaggeration -of the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy were likely to be far more -numerous.”[115] To Cromwell the immediate thing was the royalist -danger; it was no season for embarking on democratic experiments -with which he had no sympathy. The breach between Cromwell and the -Levellers widened, and as Cromwell became more and more impatient -of their agitation, distrust and suspicion of Cromwell and of the -newly-appointed Council of State ripened, in 1649, into revolt.[116] -It is the perennial misunderstanding between the statesman and the -agitator. The one weighted by responsibility can rarely travel at -the pace of the other, untrammelled by office, and as the distance -between the two lengthens, it seems they are not even pursuing the same -course--as, indeed, very often they are not. - -Lilburne had none of Cromwell’s anxieties as to a possible royalist -reaction; for him the danger could not come from the dethroned king -and his defeated cavaliers, but from a parliamentary oligarchy or -a military dictatorship. But he overestimated the strength of the -Leveller movement in the army. With the presentation of the “Agreement -of the People” the bulk of the discontent in the army diminished, and -while the Levellers who remained became in several regiments openly -mutinous, the movement generally died down, so that when the revolt -came, it was suppressed without difficulty.[117] - -Lilburne was out of prison at the beginning of 1649. He took no part in -the trial of Charles I., and let it be known that he doubted the wisdom -of abolishing monarchy before a new constitution had been drawn up. - -As neither the remnant of the Long Parliament nor Cromwell and Fairfax -were doing anything to set up this new constitution, Lilburne proceeded -to lay a remonstrance before parliament, and to follow this up by his -two pamphlets on “England’s New Chains.” He now urged that “committees -of short continuance” should supersede the Council of State, that the -Self-denying Ordinance should be put in force, “seeing how dangerous it -was for one and the same persons to be continued long in the highest -commands of a military power,”[118] that a new parliament should be -elected, and the “Agreement of the People” proceeded with heartily. -At the same time he called for army reform by a reconstruction of the -General Council and the election of agitators. - -The expulsion of five troopers from the army for directly petitioning -parliament provoked another pamphlet--“The Hunting of the Foxes from -Newmarket to Whitehall by five small beagles late of the army.” The -argument here was that Cromwell, Ireton, and Harrison ruled the council -of officers, and that the council of officers ruled parliament and the -nation. “The old king’s person and the old lords are but removed, and a -new king and new lords with the commons are in one House, and so we are -under a more absolute arbitrary monarchy than before.” - -There was only one answer to be made to Lilburne’s pen, and that was -to arrest the man who held it, for the commonwealth had no one on its -side who could reply to him. At the end of March Lilburne and three -of his supporters, Walwyn, Prince, and Richard Overton were arrested -as traitors, “England’s New Chains” having been voted by parliament -seditious and destructive of the government, and were committed to the -Tower to await trial. - -At once a petition was got up and signed by 80,000 persons for -Lilburne’s release, and a fortnight later--April 18th--another petition -was taken to the bar of the House of Commons to the same effect. -Parliament promised that the prisoners should have a legal trial, but -declared the course of justice must not be interfered with. A large -deputation of women also appeared at Westminster on April 23rd with a -similar petition; but these were forbidden to enter the House, and, -admonished by members to “go home and wash their dishes,” answered they -would soon have no dishes to wash.[119] - -Lilburne was not brought to trial till October, and in the six months’ -interval, though the output of democratic pamphlets continued from -the Tower, the Leveller movement in the army ended in open mutiny and -defeat. - -Carlyle tells the story accurately enough of the mutiny in Whalley’s -regiment in Bishopsgate, London, on April 25th: - - They want this and that; they seize their colours from the - cornet, who is lodged at the “Bull” there; the general - (Fairfax) and lieutenant-general (Cromwell) have to hasten - thither, quell them, pack them forth on their march, seizing - fifteen of them first to be tried by court-martial. Tried by - instant court-martial, five of them are found guilty, doomed - to die, but pardoned; and one of them, Trooper Lockyer, is - doomed and not pardoned.[120] Trooper Lockyer is shot in - Paul’s Churchyard on the morrow. A very brave young man, they - say; though but three-and-twenty. “He has served seven years - in these wars,” ever since the wars began. “Religious,” too, - “of excellent parts and much beloved”; but with hot notions - as to human freedom, and the rate at which the milleniums are - attainable. Poor Lockyer! He falls shot in Paul’s Churchyard - on Friday, amid the tears of men and women. Lockyer’s corpse - is watched and wept over, not without prayer, in the eastern - regions of the city, till a new week come; and on Monday, this - is what we see advancing westward by way of funeral to him: - - About one thousand went before the corpse, five or six in a - file; the corpse was then brought, with six trumpets sounding - a soldier’s knell, then the trooper’s horse came, clothed all - over in mourning, and led by a footman. The corpse was adorned - with bundles of rosemary, one half stained in blood, and the - sword of the deceased along with them. Some thousands followed - in ranks and files, all had sea-green and black ribbon tied on - their hats and to their breasts, and the women brought up the - rear. - - At the new churchyard at Westminster some thousands more of the - better sort met them, who thought not fit to march through the - city. Many looked upon this funeral as an affront to parliament - and the army; others called these people “Levellers”; but they - took no notice of any of them.[121] - -In May one Corporal William Thompson rallied a body of Levellers at -Banbury, published a manifesto called “England’s Standard Advanced,” -and inveighed against the tyranny of courts-martial. Overwhelmed by -force of numbers, Thompson escaped, and later died fighting alone near -Wellingborough. Some twenty of his followers joined the mutineers of -Scrope’s regiment at Salisbury. Numbering some 1,200, these Levellers -made their way by Marlborough and Wantage to Burford. Here Cromwell -came up with the mutineers, and surprised them at midnight. Resistance -was hopeless, and the majority at once surrendered. All were pardoned -except Cornet Thompson (brother to William), and two corporals--Church -and Perkins--who showed neither fear nor admitted any wrong on their -part. These three men were shot in Burford churchyard on May 15th,[122] -and with their deaths the Leveller movement was at an end. - -But Lilburne was unsubdued. His new “Agreement of the Free People,” -published on May 1st, called for annual parliaments elected by manhood -suffrage--pensioners, militant royalists, and lawyers excluded--and -for the free election of unendowed church ministers in each parish. -At the same time he disclaimed all connection with Winstanley’s -“Diggers”--political reform was Lilburne’s demand.[123] - -Released on bail in July, Lilburne issued in August an “Impeachment for -High Treason against Oliver Cromwell and his son-in-law, James Ireton.” -In this his hatred of government by the army compels the admission that -monarchy is preferable to a military despotism: “If we must have a -king, I for my part would rather have the prince than any man in the -world.... For the present army to set up the pretended Saint Oliver or -any other as their elected king, there will be nothing thereby from the -beginning of the chapter to the end thereof but wars and the cutting -of throats year after year; yea, and the absolute keeping up of a -perpetual army under which the people are absolute and perfect slaves.” - -Thereupon, instead of bringing him to trial, the government merely -issued a warrant for Lilburne’s arrest. The agitator met this by -a stronger manifesto, “An Outcry of the Young Men and Apprentices -of London,” calling on the army to rise in support of a democratic -parliament and to vindicate the men executed at Burford. Some response -came from the garrison at Oxford, who summoned their officers to join -in the demand for a free parliament, but no success attended this step. - -At last in October Lilburne was brought to trial at the Guildhall, -not on the charge for which he had been first committed to the Tower -in March, but for the “treason” of his later pamphlets. The trial is -memorable for Lilburne’s demand that counsel should be assigned to -him in the event of legal technicalities arising, and for his bidding -the jury remember they were judges of law as well as of fact. His -real defence lay in the question he had put so often: Was England to -be governed by the sword and a mock parliament, or by duly elected -representatives of the People? The jury understood that Lilburne was on -trial for putting that question, and, agreeing with him, they acquitted -him. The verdict was received with tremendous applause, and “a loud and -unanimous shout” of triumph went up from the citizens of London in the -Guildhall.[124] - -In December Lilburne was elected to the common council of the city, -but parliament promptly declared the election void. “Fiercely as -Lilburne attacked Cromwell, there was at times considerable liking -between the two men, and they met on friendly terms before Cromwell -went to Scotland in 1650. Cromwell assured Lilburne of his desire -to make England enjoy the real fruit of all the army’s promises and -declarations,” and friendly relations lasted till Cromwell’s return. -But, in Cromwell’s absence, Lilburne charged Hazlerigg with corruption -in the administration of justice concerning a disputed colliery lease -in Durham, and parliament took up the matter. In January, 1652, it -declared Lilburne’s petition for redress a libel, and imposed a fine of -£7,000 with a sentence of banishment for life. - -This proceeding by parliament revived the methods of the Star Chamber -in imposing a conviction and a sentence without trial, but the House of -Commons was determined to stop Lilburne’s activities at all cost. - -Cromwell made no effort to hinder the conviction, and Lilburne insisted -that Cromwell’s professions of friendship were hypocritical, and that -the general himself was responsible for the sentence. - -For the time Lilburne retired to Holland, where he discussed favourably -the chances of a royalist restoration. But on the expulsion of the -Rump of the Long Parliament the agitator at once wrote off to Cromwell -for permission to return to England, and getting no answer crossed -to London in June, 1653, and settled in lodgings in Moorfields. He -petitioned Cromwell and the Council of State for leave to remain -unmolested, promising to live peacefully, but Cromwell, with the whole -government on his shoulders, had no willingness to incur the risk -Lilburne and his doctrine of popular rights involved to the safety of -the State. - -Lilburne was promptly arrested by Cromwell’s order and brought to trial -at the Old Bailey on July 13th. The government case was that he had -returned to England knowing that a sentence of death was decreed by -parliament if he broke his exile. - -Lilburne’s defence, in the main, was that the parliament which had -passed sentence was dead, and that if Cromwell had acted justly in -dissolving it, then its unjust actions ought not to be maintained; if -Cromwell had acted unjustly, why was he not punished? - -Again the jury acquitted him, and again the people of London expressed -their satisfaction at the verdict, “the very soldiers sent to guard the -court joining in the shouts, and beating their drums and sounding their -trumpets as they passed along the streets to their quarters.” - -But “for the peace of the nation” Cromwell would not let Lilburne be at -large. Back in the Tower, then at Guernsey, and then in Dover Castle -for more than two years Lilburne was a prisoner. - -His health was broken in 1656, and consumption had set in. Death was -near, and for John Lilburne the days of “carnal sword-fighting and -fleshly hustlings and contests” were over. He wrote to Cromwell from -Dover Castle telling the Lord Protector of his conversion to Quakerism, -and Cromwell, assured that there was to be no more agitation from -“Free-Born John,” granted his release, and a pension of 40s. a week. - -The battle was over for John Lilburne, liberty could not stay the -hand of death. The many imprisonments and close confinements had done -their work, and rapid consumption marked down the man who had stood up -against the whole might of Cromwell’s government. - -John Lilburne died at Eltham in August, 1657, at the age of forty. A -year later, and his old antagonist, and older comrade-in-arms, Oliver -Cromwell, Lord Protector, was dead, and the Commonwealth government -which had contemned the agitation for democracy was doomed. - - - - -Winstanley the Digger - -1649–1650 - - -AUTHORITIES: Winstanley’s Pamphlets; Whitelocke--_Memorial of English -Affairs_; Clarke Papers; L. H. Berens--_Digger Movement in the days of -the Commonwealth_. - - - - -WINSTANLEY THE DIGGER - -1649–1650. - - -In the spring of 1649, the “Digger” movement revealed a strange -and unexpected manifestation of the democratic spirit in England. -Free communism had been the creed of more than one Protestant sect -on the continent in the sixteenth century, and the Anabaptists had -been conspicuously identified with the proposal. But in England John -Lilburne and the Levellers were attacking the parliamentary government -in the name of political democracy, and social agitation had been -unknown since the Norfolk Rising of 1549, save for a riot against land -enclosures at the beginning of James I.’s reign. - -Gerrard Winstanley was the leader at the sudden outbreak of social -discontent, and his “Digger” movement was to end this discontent and -all other miseries of the time by getting rid of enclosures of common -lands, and allowing people to plough these common lands and waste -spaces, “that all may feed upon the crops of the earth, and the burden -of poverty be removed.” - -Little is known of Winstanley, and the movement is shortlived. The -“Diggers” never threatened the safety of the Commonwealth government -as Lilburne and the Levellers did, for Winstanley’s social doctrine -included the non-resistance principles that later found exponents -in the Society of Friends, and the agrarian revolution he preached -could hardly be accomplished without force of arms. What is notable -about Winstanley is his witness to the fact that a social question -existed--that he saw beyond the Civil War, and the strife for political -liberties, a great mass of poverty unheeded; and seeing the miseries of -his fellows resolutely thought out some cure for their distress, and -did his best, as it seemed to him, to get this cure adopted. - -Neither the Council of State nor the republican army had time or -patience for Winstanley’s schemes, and the “Diggers” were dispersed -with little trouble; but Winstanley’s religious teaching was to -exercise considerable influence in the world when George Fox became its -preacher, and his social teaching on the land question has thousands of -disciples in Great Britain to-day. - -Gerrard Winstanley was born in Lancashire in 1609.[125] He seems to -have settled in London as a small trader and to have lost what money he -had in business--cheated he says, “in the thieving art of buying and -selling, and by the burdens of and for the soldiery in the beginning -of the war”--so that he was obliged “to accept of the good-will of -friends to live a country life.” In the country Winstanley ponders the -source of the ills around him, and, having some considerable gift of -expression, gives utterance, in a number of pamphlets, to a cry for -reform, and gathers followers. - -In December, 1648, Winstanley (or one of his friends) issued the -earliest of the Digger publications under the title of “Light Shining -in Buckinghamshire--A Discovery of the Main Ground, Original Cause -of all the Slavery of the World, but chiefly in England. Presented -by way of a Declaration of many of the Well-affected in that County, -to all their poor oppressed Countrymen in England. And also to the -consideration of the present army under the conduct of the Lord -Fairfax.” - -A month later and Winstanley publishes his “New Law of Righteousness: -Budding forth to restore the whole Creation from the Bondage of the -Curse. Or a glimpse of the new Heaven and the new Earth, wherein dwells -Righteousness.” Here, with a good deal of mystical religious phrasing -(the author explains that when he was in a trance the message came -to him), Winstanley proclaims his calling and unfolds his agrarian -proposals: - - And when the Lord doth show unto me the place and manner, how - He will have us that are called common people manure and work - upon the common lands, I will then go forth and declare it by - my action, to eat my bread by the sweat of my brow, without - either giving or taking hire, looking upon the land as freely - mine as another’s. - -There is to be no forcible expropriation of landlords: - - If the rich still hold fast to this propriety of Mine and - Thine, let them labour their own lands with their own hands. - And let the common people, that say the earth is _ours_, not - _mine_, let them labor together, and eat bread together upon - the commons, mountains, and hills. - - For as the enclosures are called such a man’s land, and - such a man’s land, so the Commons and Heath are called the - common people’s. And let the world see who labor the earth in - righteousness, and those to whom the Lord gives the blessing, - let them be the people that shall inherit the earth. - - None can say that their right is taken from them. For let the - rich work alone by themselves; and let the poor work together - by themselves. The rich in their enclosures, saying, _This is - mine_; and the poor upon the commons, saying, _This is ours, - the earth and its fruits are common_. And who can be offended - at the poor for doing this? None but covetous, proud, idle, - pampered flesh, that would have the poor work still for this - devil (particular interest) to maintain his greatness that he - may live at ease. - - Was the earth made for to preserve a few covetous, proud men - to live at ease, and for them to bag and barn up the treasures - of the earth from others, that these may beg or starve in a - fruitful land: or was it made to preserve all her children? Let - Reason and the Prophets’ and Apostles’ writings be judge.... - For the earth is the Lord’s; that is the spreading Power of - Righteousness, not the inheritance of covetous proud flesh that - dies. If any man can say that he makes corn or cattle, he may - say, _That is mine_. But if the Lord made these for the use of - His creation, surely then the earth was made by the Lord to be - a Common Treasury for all, not a particular treasury for some. - - Leave off dominion and lordship one over another; for the - whole bulk of mankind are but one living earth. Leave off - imprisoning, whipping, and killing, which are but the actings - of the curse. Let those that have hitherto had no land, and - have been forced to rob and steal through poverty; henceforth - let them quietly enjoy land to work upon, that everyone may - enjoy the benefit of his creation, and eat his own bread - with the sweat of his own brows. For surely this particular - propriety of mine and thine hath brought in all misery upon - people. First it hath occasioned people to steal from one - another. Secondly it hath made laws to hang those that did - steal. It tempts people to do an evil action, and then kills - them for doing of it. Let all judge whether this be not a great - evil. - -In April, 1649, the time was ripe--so Winstanley and his friends -judged--for making a start to get rid of this evil. - -The Council of State, but a few months old, and much occupied with -dangers in Scotland and Ireland, and with mutinous Levellers in -the army, was suddenly informed of the strange activities of “a -disorderly and tumultuous sort of people” by one Henry Sanders, of -Walton-upon-Thames. - -Sanders’ testimony affirmed that “there was one Everard, once of the -army but was cashiered, who termeth himself a prophet, one Stewer and -Colten, and two more, all living at Cobham, came to St. George’s Hill -in Surrey, and began to dig on that side the hill next to Camp Close, -and sowed the ground with parsnips, carrots, and beans. On Monday -following they were there again, being increased in their number, and -on the next day they fired the heath, and burned at least forty rood of -heath, which is a very great prejudice to the town. On Friday last they -came again, between twenty and thirty, and wrought all day at digging. -They did then intend to have two or three ploughs at work, but they had -not furnished themselves with seed-corn, which they did on Saturday -at Kingston. They invite all to come in and help them, and promise -them meat, drink, and clothes. They do threaten to pull down and level -all park pales, and lay open, and intend to plant there very shortly. -They give out they will be four or five thousand within ten days, and -threaten the neighbouring people there, that they will make them all -come up to the hills and work: and forewarn them suffering their cattle -to come near the plantation; if they do, they will cut their legs off. -It is feared they have some design in hand.”[126] - -The date of this information was April 16th, and Bradshaw, the -President of the Council, at once asked General Fairfax “to disperse -the people so met, and to prevent the like for the future, that a -malignant and disaffected party may not under colour of such ridiculous -people have any opportunity to rendezvous themselves in order to do a -greater mischief.” - -Fairfax sent Captain John Gladman to attend to the matter, and Gladman -reports three days later that Mr. Winstanley and Mr. Everard are the -chief men responsible, that he “cannot hear that there have been above -twenty of them together since they first undertook the business,” and -that Mr. Winstanley and Mr. Everard will wait upon Lord Fairfax. He -adds; “I believe you will be glad to be rid of them again, especially -Everard, who is no other than a mad man. I intend to go with two or -three men to St. George’s Hill this day and persuade these people to -leave this employment if I can, and if then I see no more danger than -now I do I shall march back again to London to-morrow.” Gladman’s -opinion is that “the business is not worth the writing nor yet taking -notice of.” - -The interview between Fairfax and Winstanley and Everard took place -on April 20, and Everard explained that the Diggers “did not intend -to meddle with any man’s property nor to break down any pales or -enclosures, but only to meddle with what was common and untilled, and -to make it fruitful for the use of man: that they will not defend -themselves by arms, but will submit unto authority; that as their -forefathers lived in tents, so it would be suitable to their condition -now to live in the same.” - -Fairfax evidently decided that the movement was not so alarming as -the Council of State had represented, for Winstanley and his Diggers -resumed their work, and at the end of May, Fairfax, with the officers -of the army, paid a visit to St. George’s Hill. Winstanley returned -“sober answers” to the inquiries of Fairfax, “though they gave little -satisfaction (if any at all) in regard of the strangeness of their -action.” Winstanley’s argument, often enlarged in his pamphlets, was -that the people were dispossessed of their lands by the crown at the -Norman Conquest, and that “the king who possessed them by the Norman -Conquest being dead, they were returned again, being Crown Lands, to -the Common People of England.” - -This was not conclusive to their visitors, and “some officers wished -they had no further plot in what they did, and that no more was -intended than what they did pretend.” To the objection that the ground -was too poor to repay cultivation, “the Diggers answered they would use -their endeavours and leave the success to God, who had promised to make -the barren ground fruitful.” Public opinion gave out that the Diggers -were “sober, honest men,” and that “the ground will probably in a short -time yield them some fruit of their labour, how contemptible soever -they do yet appear to be.” - -Encouraged by Fairfax’s “kindness and moderation,” Winstanley appeals -to him in June against the interference of the local landowners, and -getting no response (for Fairfax had said that the Diggers were to -be left to “the Gentlemen of the County and the Law of the Land”), -publishes an appeal to the House of Commons against his arrest for -trespass by the Lords of Manors in Surrey. The House of Commons, -occupied with State matters, turned an indifferent ear to Winstanley’s -complaint, and the leader of the Diggers sent a “Watchword to the City -of London and the Army,” telling the wrongs the Diggers suffered at the -hands of the law for “digging upon the barren common”--how they were -mulcted in damages at £10 a man, with costs at twenty-nine shillings -and a penny, and taken in execution, and how their cows were seized by -the bailiffs. At the end of November the very huts they had built were -pulled down, and it was a hard winter for the little colony still left -on St. George’s Hill. - -Winstanley does not merely relate his injuries in these publications, -he is all the time urging that his plan for setting people upon the -common lands is the needful thing in England, that a common ownership -of land is God’s will, and that the crown lands taken by the Normans -must revert to the people on the execution of the king. - -In the spring of 1650 an attempt was made to extend the digging -propaganda--for the planting of St. George’s Hill was doomed--and -some of Winstanley’s disciples made a tour through the counties of -Middlesex, Bedford, Hertford, Huntingdon, and Northampton, settling -down at last on some waste ground near Wellingborough. Here they were -very soon arrested by a local justice of the peace, the Council of -State ordered their prosecution, and the movement was suppressed. - -To the Council of State these Diggers were “Levellers,”[127] “intruders -upon other men’s properties,” “seditious and tumultuous,” against whom -the public peace must be preserved. - -Of Winstanley’s future, when the days of the digging were over, nothing -seems to be known. Only one pamphlet is issued by him after 1650--“The -Law of Freedom in a Platform; or, True Magistracy Restored”--an open -letter to Oliver Cromwell, February, 1652. With this final manifesto -on the land question, and on the whole social question, as he saw -it, Gerrard Winstanley disappears from history. In the multitude of -prophets and preachers, visionaries and practical reformers of the -Commonwealth, Winstanley is little heeded by his contemporaries. The -importance of his mission is seen more clearly to-day, when statesmen, -politicians, and philanthropists all urge agrarian changes and the -excellence of land culture. - -As to Winstanley’s claim on behalf of the people to the common lands, -the advantage of possession of these lands was realized by the -landowners in the eighteenth century, and from 1760 to 1830 more than a -thousand acts of parliament were passed for enclosing these lands.[128] - -In “The Diggers Song,” (of unknown authorship[129]), the outlook of -Winstanley and his followers is expressed in popular form: - - You noble Diggers all, stand up now, stand up now, - You noble Diggers all, stand up now, - The waste land to maintain, seeing Cavaliers by name, - Your digging do disdain; and persons all defame. - Stand up now, stand up now. - - Your houses they pull down, stand up now, stand up now, - Your houses they pull down, stand up now; - Your houses they pull down to fright poor men in town, - But the Gentry must come down, and the poor shall wear the crown. - Stand up now, Diggers all! - - With spades, and hoes, and plowes, stand up now, stand up now, - With spades, and hoes, and plowes, stand up now; - Your freedom to uphold, seeing Cavaliers are bold - To kill you if they could, and rights from you withhold. - Stand up now, Diggers all! - - Their self-will is their law, stand up now, stand up now, - Their self-will is their law, stand up now; - Since tyranny came in, they count it now no sin - To make a gaol a gin, to starve poor men therein. - Stand up now, stand up now. - - The Gentry are all round, stand up now, stand up now, - The Gentry are all round, stand up now; - The Gentry are all round, on each side they are found, - Their wisdoms so profound to cheat us of our ground. - Stand up now, stand up now. - - The Lawyers they conjoin, stand up now, stand up now, - The Lawyers they conjoin, stand up now; - To arrest you they advise, such fury they devise, - The devil in them lies, and hath blinded both their eyes. - Stand up now, stand up now. - - The Clergy they come in, stand up now, stand up now, - The Clergy they come in, stand up now; - The Clergy they come in, and say it is a sin - That we should now begin our freedom for to win. - Stand up now, Diggers all! - - The tithes they yet will have, stand up now, stand up now, - The tithes they yet will have, stand up now; - The tithes they yet will have, and Lawyers their fees crave, - And this they say is brave, to make the poor their slave. - Stand up now, Diggers all! - - ’Gainst Lawyers and ’gainst Priests, stand up now, stand up now, - ’Gainst Lawyers and ’gainst Priests, stand up now; - For tyrants they are both, even flat against their oath, - To grant us they are loath, free meat, and drink and cloth. - Stand up now, Diggers all! - - The club is all their law, stand up now, stand up now, - The club is all their law, stand up now; - The club is all their law, to keep poor men in awe, - But they no vision saw, to maintain such a law. - Stand up now, Diggers all! - - The Cavaliers are foes, stand up now, stand up now, - The Cavaliers are foes, stand up now; - The Cavaliers are foes, themselves they do disclose - By verses, not in prose, to please the singing boys. - Stand up now, Diggers all! - - To conquer them by love, come in now, come in now, - To conquer them by love, come in now; - To conquer them by love, as it does you behove, - For He is King above, no Power is like to Love. - Glory here, Diggers all. - - - - -Major Cartwright - -“The Father of Reform” - -1775–1824 - - -AUTHORITIES: _Life and Correspondence of Major Cartwright_, edited by -his Niece, 1826; _A Memoir of John Cartwright the Reformer_, 1831; _The -Times_, September 25th, 1824; Graham Wallas--_Francis Place_. - -[Illustration: MAJOR CARTWRIGHT - -(_From a Contemporary Drawing._)] - - - - -MAJOR CARTWRIGHT “THE FATHER OF REFORM” - -1775–1824. - - -The substance of Major Cartwright’s life is told on the pedestal -beneath his statue in the dingy garden of Burton Crescent, to the south -of Euston Road, in London. - - JOHN CARTWRIGHT, - - Born 28th September, 1740. Died 23rd September, 1824. - - The Firm, Consistent and Persevering Advocate of _Universal - Suffrage_, Equal Representation, Vote by Ballot and Annual - Parliaments. - - He was the first English Writer who openly maintained the - Independence of the United States of America, and although his - distinguished merits as a Naval Officer in 1776 presented the - most flattering Prospects of Professional Advancement, yet he - nobly refused to draw his Sword against the Rising Liberties of - an oppressed and struggling People. - - In Grateful Commemoration of his inflexible integrity, exalted - Patriotism, “profound Constitutional Knowledge,” and in sincere - admiration of the unblemished Virtues of his Private Life, - - THIS STATUE - - was erected by Public Subscription near the spot where he - closed his useful and meritorious career. - -There is nothing false or exaggerated in this epitaph. Fox, in the -House of Commons, testified to Cartwright’s “profound constitutional -knowledge.” Hazlitt, who never met Cartwright, classed him with the -men of one idea (and lingered over the subject), but the charge is -ill-founded. It is true that for nearly fifty years, in season and out -of season, Cartwright, a pupil of Locke in politics, contended publicly -for annual parliaments and manhood suffrage, claiming personality and -not property as the ground for enfranchisement, and insisting that -while the right of the rich and the poor to the vote was equal, the -need of the latter was far greater. But this agitation was by no means -the limit either of his ideas or his activities. - -Entering the navy at eighteen, John Cartwright, who came of an old -Nottingham family, devised improvements in the gun service, and, made a -lieutenant, was marked for high promotion. The revolt of the American -colonies cut short his professional career. An innate love of liberty -compelled the young naval officer to side with the colonists, and -he writes in 1776 that it is a mistaken notion that the planting of -colonies and the extending of empire are necessarily the same things. -Self-governing colonies, he declares, bound to England only by “the -ties of blood and mutual interests, by sincere love and friendship, -which abhors dependence, and by every other cementing principle which -hath power to take hold of the human heart,” are to be desired. - -Lord Howe put Cartwright’s principles to the test by inviting him to -join the expedition against the Americans, and Cartwright, who was -“passionately attached to the navy,” and had an immense admiration for -Howe, could only answer that he was unable to take part in a war he -thought unjust. With this refusal his naval services were ended, in -spite of Howe’s quiet and dignified reply that “opinions in politics -are to be treated like opinions in religion.” (No word of reproach came -from Howe, no taunt of want of courage or lack of patriotism.) - -Cartwright never condemned all war. He urged in a letter to a nephew in -the army that the answer to the question of the justice or injustice -of a war decided whether justifiable homicide or wilful murder was -committed by those engaged in battle. He hated standing armies and -barracks and barrack life, and all the pomp and glory of militarism, as -heartily as he hated the attempt to coerce the colonists. But no sooner -was he out of the navy than, with a major’s commission, he at once -set to work to train the Nottinghamshire militia, only retiring from -this post in 1791 when the government cancelled his appointment for -attending a meeting called to celebrate the fall of the Bastille. - -The militia in Cartwright’s view was strictly a citizen army for home -defence. “The militia,” he wrote, “by its institution is not intended -to spread the dominion or to vindicate in war the honour of the crown, -but it is to preserve our laws and liberties, and therein to secure the -existence of the State.” Thirteen years before the fall of the Bastille -Major Cartwright had the cap of liberty displayed on the banners and -engraved on the buttons of the Nottinghamshire Militia. A greater -service than providing symbols of liberty was rendered to the army by -Cartwright in the matter of better clothing for the men. The misery -endured by ill-clad sentries aroused his compassion and indignation, -and Cartwright worried the government until it provided great-coats for -all private soldiers. - -The humaner courage is as conspicuous in John Cartwright’s long life as -his political enthusiasm. - -Four times he risked his life to save others from drowning, rescuing -two men from the Trent, a naval officer at sea, and, in late -middle-life, a small boy who had fallen into the New River, near -London. In the year 1800, hearing of a riot planned at Sheffield, -Cartwright made his way alone to the barn where the conspirators were -assembled, and stayed all night, reasoning with them against their -project. In the morning the confederates, dissuaded from violence, -quietly dispersed, and the riot was prevented. - -An untiring advocacy of democratic politics earned for Cartwright, -justly, the title of “The Father of Reform.” He was the real founder -of that movement for political reform, which in the nineteenth -century swept away rotten boroughs, gave representation to all towns -of importance, and extended the franchise to the great bulk of male -householders in town and country; which to-day presses towards a -general suffrage for men and women. - -Major Cartwright began his speeches and pamphlets on behalf of -political reform in 1776, just after his retirement from the navy, and -his acceptance of the commission in the militia. - -The ideas of the French Encyclopædists, the writings of Rousseau, and -the revolt of the American colonists, had aroused a belief in social -equality, and the “natural” rights of man, and this belief Cartwright -championed till his death. His early pamphlets, beginning with -“Legislative Rights of the Commonalty Vindicated,” (1777) are heavy -reading to-day, but in them Cartwright argued for all the famous “six -points” of the People’s Charter of fifty years later--Universal Manhood -Suffrage, Annual Parliaments, Vote by Ballot, Abolition of Property -Qualification for Parliamentary Candidates, Payment of Members, and -Equal Electoral Districts. He even uses the modern phrase in urging -“one man one vote.” - -Unlike Thomas Paine, and many of the “Radical Reformers,” Cartwright -pleads for political democracy as the natural outcome of the Christian -faith, maintaining that “No man can have a right sense and belief -of Christianity who denies the equality of all conditions of men.” -Incidentally, challenged on the point of why not Votes for Women? -Cartwright could only fall back on certain passages in the Bible to -justify his objection to Women’s Enfranchisement. Nothing was more -abhorrent to his mind than the notion that government was a matter -for “experts,” an exclusive affair for persons with specially trained -intelligences. “Of all the errors to which mankind have ever submitted -their understandings,” he wrote, “there is no one to be more lamented -than that of conceiving the business of civil government to be above -the comprehension of ordinary capacities.” - -The poor, because of their very poverty, had a need for the vote and -for parliamentary representation which the man of property could not -experience. This Cartwright emphasised in a petition he presented to -the House of Commons as late as 1820: - - And when your Honourable House shall further consider that the - humblest mortal on earth is equally a co-heir of an immortality - with the most exalted who now wears stars, or coronets, or - crowns, your petitioner hopes that your Honourable House - will rise superior to the mean thoughts and vulgar prejudices - of the uncharitable among the wealthy, the ignorant, the - interested, the vain, and the proud; and will acknowledge - that, in reference to the respective claims of legislative - representation by the poor and the rich, the poor have equal - right but far more need. - -Enthusiasm and an entirely disinterested zeal for democracy kept -the spirit of youth in Cartwright, and carried him at the age of -80 over a trial for sedition undisturbed. His zeal was not to be -quenched. “Moderation in practice may be commendable,” he declared, -“but moderation in principle is detestable. Can we trust a man who is -moderately honest, or esteem a woman who is moderately virtuous?” - -This very allegiance to principle had its drawbacks in the world of -practical politics, of corruption and compromise. Three times Major -Cartwright stood for parliament: for the county of Nottingham in 1780, -for Boston in 1806 and 1807; and on each occasion he was at the bottom -of the poll. His nominations for Westminster in 1818 and 1819 received -no serious support at all. The old major was no more distressed by any -feeling of personal disappointment at these defeats than he was cast -down at seeing no signs of the triumph of political democracy in his -lifetime. At eighty-four we find him writing cheerfully, “To despair in -a good cause is to approach towards atheism.” - -Cartwright did not live to see the passage of the great Reform Bill of -1832. Wilkes’ motion for reform in 1776 had been negatived in the House -of Commons without a division. In 1780 the Duke of Richmond’s motion -in the House of Lords for manhood suffrage and annual parliaments was -mocked by the outbreak of the Gordon (“No Popery”) Riots in London on -the very day the motion was made. Pitt’s third and last effort for -parliamentary reform was rejected in 1785. The French Revolution turned -men’s minds in Great Britain towards democracy, but reaction followed -hard on the Terror in Paris, and for a time a government terror crushed -every expression in favour of political liberty in England. Sir Francis -Burdett became the parliamentary leader of the “radical reformers” -early in the nineteenth century, and in 1809 found fifteen supporters -in the House of Commons. Ten years later the government, in the face -of a strong working-class movement for political reform, brought -out the military against the people at a peaceful meeting held at -Peterloo, near Manchester, and followed this up by six repressive acts -of parliament, and a general prosecution of the leaders of the reform -agitation. - -Cartwright was eighty when, with several friends, he was charged “with -being a malicious, seditious, evil-minded person, and with unlawfully -and maliciously intending and designing to raise disaffection and -discontent in the minds of his majesty’s subjects.” - -All England knew that Major Cartwright was a single-minded and -high-principled man, in whose heart was neither guile nor malice, a -man who had proved his loyalty and patriotism over and over again, -and was no more seditious than he was evil-minded or disaffected. -Apart from his advocacy of political reform and his services to the -militia, Cartwright had done much for farming and agriculture, he had -helped Clarkson and Wilberforce in their anti-slavery work, and he had -called the attention of the government, as loudly as he could, to the -defenceless state of the east coast against foreign invasion. Yet in -1820 a British jury, obedient to the orders of a political judge, found -John Cartwright guilty of “maliciously intending and designing to raise -disaffection and discontent,” and a fine of £100 was inflicted. - -Francis Place, the radical tailor of Charing Cross, in whose shop the -later Chartists and Reformers were to be found, gives his impression of -Major Cartwright as he knew him in old age: - -“When he was in town he used frequently to sup with me, eating some -raisins he brought in his pocket, and drinking weak gin and water. -He was cheerful, agreeable, and full of curious anecdote. He was, -however, in political matters exceedingly troublesome and sometimes as -exceedingly absurd. He had read but little, or to little purpose, and -knew nothing of general principles. He entertained a vague and absurd -notion of the political arrangements of the Anglo-Saxons, and sincerely -believed that these semi-barbarians were not only a political people, -but that their ‘twofold polity,’ arms-bearing and representation, were -universal and perfect.”[130] - -To Place, chief political wire-puller of his age, industrious and -persistent in getting things done, with a typical cockney politician’s -scorn of disinterested enthusiasm, Major Cartwright appeared -“troublesome” and “absurd”--Francis Place had quite an honest liking -for the “old gentleman,” as he called him, all the same. By the -government Cartwright stood convicted as a “seditious, evil-minded -person.” Posterity is content to know John Cartwright by the title his -contemporaries conferred upon him--the Father of Reform--and to rank -him as the foremost man in England in the eighteenth century to raise -the standard of Political Democracy. - - - - -Ernest Jones and Chartism - -1838–1854 - - -AUTHORITIES: R. G. Gamage--_History of the Chartist Movement_; Thos. -Frost--_Forty Years’ Recollections_; Ernest Charles Jones--_Songs -of Democracy_; Graham Wallas--_Life of Francis Place_; J. A. -Hobson--_Ernest Jones_, in _Dictionary of National Biography_; _The -Times_, Jan. 27, 29; Mar. 31, 1869. - - - - -ERNEST JONES AND CHARTISM - -1838–1854. - - -The Chartist agitation was at once the largest, the most revolutionary, -and the least successful of all the serious political movements of -the first half of the nineteenth century. For ten years, with varying -fortune, it threatened the authority of parliament, and then slowly -expired--destroyed by its own internal weakness and the quarrels of its -leaders rather than by the repression of the government. - -The failure of the great Reform Act of 1832 to accomplish any -particular improvement in the lot of the mass of working people brought -the Chartist movement to life,[131] and roused the politically minded -leaders of the workmen to agitate for changes in the constitution that -would place political power in the hands of the whole people. - -The six points of the Charter, embodied in the “People’s Charter” drawn -up by Francis Place and Lovett in 1838, revived the old programme -of Major Cartwright and, in substance, the earlier demands of John -Lilburne and the Levellers. Universal manhood suffrage, the ballot, -payment of members of parliament, equal electoral districts, abolition -of property qualification for members, and annual parliaments, these -were the “six points” of the Charter, the platform of its advocates, -and for ten years the hope of multitudes of earnest and devoted men and -women. - -Francis Place and the Working-Men’s Association which gave Chartism -its name and programme never had any considerable voice in its -direction.[132] - -Feargus O’Connor, who had sat in parliament from 1832 to 1835 for an -Irish constituency, was from the first the real leader of the movement. -His personality and his rhetorical powers roused the manufacturing -districts in the North and the Midlands to form political unions for -the Charter in 1838, and his presence dominated the first Convention, -held in London, with Lovett for its secretary. Later, O’Connor’s -obvious weaknesses, his vanity and egotism, his want of self-control -and that “one fatal disqualification for a leader of revolt--the fear -of the police”[133]--left leadership in his hands, but left him a -leader without followers. - -Next to O’Connor stood another Irish orator, James Bronterre O’Brien, a -man of finer character, and clearer head, but smaller gifts of command. - -South Wales, the manufacturing districts of Lancashire and Yorkshire, -and towns like Birmingham, Leicester, and Northampton, were the -strongholds of Chartism, and “in the dark days of the late thirties and -early forties it was a real and dangerous power.”[134] Feargus O’Connor -never advocated an armed rising, and advised the abandonment of the -huge torchlight processions; but pikes were being fashioned and men -were being drilled in preparation for a revolution that was to end the -Whig rule, and give the working classes the reins of government. The -circulation of the _Northern Star_, O’Connor’s weekly paper, stood at -50,000 in those days. - -Riots at Newport (Monmouth) and Birmingham in 1839, followed by several -arrests and imprisonments of the Chartist leaders the following year, -ended for the time all notions of a successful revolution. Lord John -Russell declared strongly against manhood suffrage when the question -was raised in the House of Commons, and on a division in the House the -petition for the Charter was rejected by 237 to 48 votes. - -The outbreak at Birmingham, provoked, in the first place, by the -interference of a body of London police with an orderly meeting in -the Bull Ring, was put down in two days by the soldiers; but not till -many houses had been attacked and a considerable amount of property -destroyed. No robberies or petty thefts accompanied the riot. - -At Newport the harsh prison treatment of Vincent, a Chartist advocate, -convicted for what was held to be a political offence, brought a crowd -of 10,000 men, led by Frost, William, and Jones, to demand his release. -The insurgents had a few rifles and pikes, but were generally unarmed, -and the fire of the military soon overpowered them. But lives were lost -on both sides, and Frost and his two lieutenants were sentenced to -death, though the sentence was at once reduced to transportation for -life, and some years later to simple banishment from British dominions. - -Feargus O’Connor, Bronterre O’Brien, and all the chief speakers of the -movement were brought to trial for seditious utterance in 1840, and in -most cases sent to prison either for twelve months or two years. - -With these imprisonments and the general election of 1841 came the -first serious disintegration of the Chartist movement.[135] O’Brien and -O’Connor differed vigorously on the question of election policy, and -before they were released from prison were expressing their opinions -in the _Northern Star_. O’Connor, full of wrath at the repressive -treatment meted out to Chartists by the Whig Government, was for -attacking the Whigs at the election, and O’Brien objected to this as a -pro-Tory policy.[136] - -The decision to run independent Chartist candidates for parliament in -certain constituencies, and the failure of these candidates to get -returned on the limited franchise of 1832, increased disunion in the -Chartist ranks and brought demoralisation. - -To make matters worse for the movement, several prominent Chartists -left prison with fresh notions and ideas of reform, which had come to -them in their long hours of solitude and reflection. Lovett, imprisoned -in connection with the Birmingham riot, though he was entirely innocent -of giving any encouragement to violence, on his release was full of -vast plans for national education, convinced that education must -precede political democracy. Vincent had become a strong temperance -advocate, and henceforth must give himself to the work of a teetotal -lecturer. Other men were for bringing in religion by “Chartist -Churches.”[137] Antagonism to the anti-corn law league of Cobden and -Bright, and later his own “National Land Company” experiments, withdrew -Feargus O’Connor from actual Chartist propaganda. - -The movement languished. But in spite of government repression, the -indifference of parliament, the hostility of the wealthier classes, and -its own jarring elements of discord, Chartism was not dead.[138] - -The misery of the English people kept it from death. With one in -every eleven of the industrial population a pauper in 1842, general -satisfaction with the state of government was impossible for men of -strong social sympathies. Some exerted themselves, like Sadler and -Oastler, in following Lord Shaftesbury’s entirely disinterested and -successful crusade against the horrors of factory oppression. Others -supported the Free Trade agitation. - -To one man, Ernest Jones, it seemed, in 1845, that before all else -must come political enfranchisement, that the social miseries and -discontents of England were not to be cured save by the people of -England. The evils might be mitigated by ameliorative legislation, but -it was not enough that the decencies of life--then very far beyond the -reach of the mass of town and country labourers--should be secured for -people; the main thing was that people should have freedom to work out -their own industrial salvation. - -So in 1846, Ernest Jones plunged boldly into Chartism. He quickly -became a leader, and his reputation has endured: for Ernest Jones was -the most respected, single-minded, and steadfast of the many who sat in -Chartist conventions. Chartism for him was the cry of the uncared-for, -because voteless, multitudes, and Ernest Jones was ready to give his -life that the cry should move the rulers of the nation. - -It was a bad time for England in 1846, that was plain,[139] and -Ernest Jones, believing with the average Englishman that in politics -lay the key to necessary change, was henceforth a Chartist advocate -and till his death the faithful preacher of democracy. Without -becoming a socialist, Ernest Jones, in his “Songs of Democracy” and -in his speeches and newspaper writings, is clear that political -enfranchisement was but the high road to social and economic reform, -that the Charter was to bring a better distribution of wealth as the -consequence of a better distribution of political power.[140] - -Ernest Jones was twenty-seven when he joined the Chartist movement. -The son of an army officer--who had been equerry to the Duke of -Cumberland--and educated on the continent, Ernest Jones came to England -when he was nineteen, and was duly presented to Queen Victoria (as -Robert Owen had been) by Lord Melbourne in 1841. He married a Miss -Atherley, of Cumberland, and settled down in London, writing novels, -verses, and newspaper articles. In 1844 he was called to the Bar, and -two years later took the step which separated him from the friends -and acquaintances of his social order, and placed him on the hard and -strenuous road of the political agitator. - -Averse from faction, realising the fatal folly of internal jealousies -and strife, and alive to the importance of discipline in the army -of revolt, Ernest Jones did his best to work with O’Connor--and was -naturally charged with cowardice by the Chartists who hated O’Connor’s -supremacy. In 1847 he began writing in the _Northern Star_, and was -joint editor with O’Connor of _The Labourer_. His “Songs of Democracy” -were to the Chartists what Ebenezer Elliott’s “Corn-Law Rhymes” were to -the Free Traders, and his “Song of the Lower Classes” has retained a -place in the song-books of social democrats to our own day. - -At the general election of 1847, when, to everybody’s astonishment, -Feargus O’Connor was elected member for Nottingham, Ernest Jones stood -for Halifax, but though immensely popular at the hustings, he only -polled 280 votes. - -1848, the memorable year of revolutions abroad, saw Chartism once -more a formidable movement in England. An enormous petition was again -prepared for parliament, and the Chartists decided to carry the -petition to the House of Commons after a mass meeting on Kennington -Common on April 10th. Lord John Russell and his Whig government became -thoroughly alarmed. The Duke of Wellington, as commander-in-chief, -undertook to guard the safety of London, and garrisoned the city with -troops, and protected the bridges, while 70,000 special constables -(of whom Prince Louis Napoleon was one) were quickly enrolled. But on -the government prohibition of any procession to Westminster, Feargus -O’Connor at once decided against any collision between the people and -the authorities. The mass meeting was held, some 50,000 persons were -present, and O’Connor and Ernest Jones made speeches. Then the petition -was sent off in a cab to parliament, and all was over. - -O’Connor had boasted that the monster petition contained 5,000,000 -signatures, but on investigation it was found that the signatures only -amounted to 1,975,496, and many of these were duplicates and forgeries. -Anti-Chartists had signed in several places, using ridiculous names, -like “Pugnose,” “Punch,” and “Fubbs,” or boldly signing as “Queen -Victoria” and “Duke of Wellington.”[141] Parliament gladly took -advantage of O’Connor’s characteristic exaggeration to discredit the -whole movement. At the same time the government hastily prepared a -bill to suppress the renewed agitation, and the “Treason Felony” bill -was passed, making “open and advised speaking with seditious intent” -a crime. This clause in the act only remained on the statute book for -two years, but it was sufficient for securing the conviction of all -prominent Chartist speakers. - -Ernest Jones, unlike Feargus O’Connor, believed that the people -should arm, and that a display of force was necessary for carrying -the Charter. The failure of April 10th strengthened this belief, and -for the next two months he was busy speaking in England and Scotland, -urging the necessity for enrolling a national guard and forming a -provisional government. - -But in spite of great public meetings the movement was already breaking -up. The Chartist Convention, which met in London on May 1st, dissolved -on May 13th in hopeless disagreement, and Ernest Jones, who had -attended as a member of the executive committee, exclaimed that “amid -the desertion of friends, and the invasion of enemies, the fusee had -been trampled out, and the elements of their energy were scattered to -the winds of heaven.” Still he tried to rally the broken ranks, and the -government decided that the time had come to put the movement down by -means of the new “Treason Felony” Act. Feargus O’Connor, now a member, -was no longer dangerous to the authorities. His attendance in the House -kept him from the agitation in the country, and Ernest Jones was the -man to be struck at. - -On May 29th and 30th Ernest Jones addressed great, but quite orderly, -meetings in London, on Clerkenwell Green and Bishop Bonner’s Fields, -and then proceeded to Manchester. Here he was arrested and put on trial -with five other Chartists--Fussell, Sharpe, Williams, Vernon, and -Looney. The judge had little patience for the prisoners, and Ernest -Jones was frequently interrupted in his defence. In the end, he and his -fellows were all found guilty of seditious speech, and Ernest Jones was -sentenced to two years’ imprisonment, to find sureties, himself in £200 -and two persons in £150, and to keep the peace for five years. - -A number of police spies procured many more arrests and convictions by -gaining admission to Chartist meetings, joining Chartist unions and -inciting the members to violent speech and an armed conspiracy. By -these means at the end of the year 1848 the government had succeeded in -getting the prominent Chartists into prison, as it had done in 1840. -That Ernest Jones exhorted his followers to learn to bear arms is -indisputable; that the success of the revolutionary movements on the -continent encouraged the belief amongst a certain number of Chartists -that an armed rising was desirable and could be successful in England -is equally true. But as no serious attempt was made in 1848 by the -“physical force” Chartists to organize such a rising, no rising took -place, and “the conspiracy,” as it was called, was chiefly the work of -the government’s police spies. - -The riots at Newport and Birmingham gave some excuse to the government -for repression in 1839–40; in 1848 no outbreaks were even threatened -to justify the sentences on Ernest Jones and other Chartist speakers. -The government’s chief concern was to end the agitation, even if this -could only be accomplished by means of a special act of parliament, and -the unsavoury methods of _agents provocateurs_. Lord John Russell and -his Whig colleagues were not the men to be kept from their purpose by -any nice discrimination in the choice of weapons. It was not the time, -when crowns were falling on the continent, to hesitate about crushing -a movement which seemed to menace public safety in England. That the -strength of Chartism was in the sober, law-abiding character of most -of its adherents the government knew no more than they knew that the -movement was already doomed for want of cohesion. - -The bitter hostility of the government pursued Ernest Jones in prison, -and left him to be treated as a common felon. Ordered to pick oakum he -refused, and was put on a diet of bread and water. The struggle between -the prisoner and his gaolers was at last brought before the House of -Commons,[142] and in the end Ernest Jones was allowed to purchase -exemption from the allotted prison tasks by a small payment of money. - -On his release from prison the Chartist movement was flickering out. It -was impossible to work with O’Connor, who, now looking favourably on -household suffrage, was already failing in health and showing signs -of the insanity which possessed him two years later. The trade-union -movement and the co-operative store were attracting the attention of -intelligent workmen, to whom for the time political enfranchisement -seemed a lost cause. Contesting Halifax in 1852, Ernest Jones only -polled 52 votes, and the _People’s Paper_, which he started in that -year and edited, never had the success of the _Northern Star_. - -Feargus O’Connor was led away from the House of Commons hopelessly -insane, to die in 1855, and Chartism utterly disintegrated could not -be revived by Ernest Jones. In 1854 the movement was extinct, and from -that time till his death Ernest Jones gave his political support to -the advanced Radicals. He contested Nottingham in 1853 and 1857, but -without success, returned to his old practice at the Bar, and wrote -novels and poems. In 1868, the year of household suffrage in the -towns, he was adopted by the Radicals as parliamentary candidate for -Manchester, and then on January 26, 1869, came a sudden failure of the -heart, and death ended all earthly hopes and plans for Ernest Jones. -He was just fifty when he died, and though Chartism had passed away, -Ernest Jones had not outlived his usefulness or his popularity with all -those who believed in the ultimate triumph of democracy, and he had -gained the respect of many earlier foes. - -The People’s Charter remains unfulfilled, but two of its points -have long been granted--the ballot, and the abolition of a property -qualification for members of parliament. Annual parliaments are no -longer desired by any section of political reformers, the extension of -the franchise to the agricultural labourer in 1884 brought manhood -suffrage appreciably nearer, equal electoral districts were never more -than a plan of quite reasonable political theorists, and the demand for -payment of members, never altogether dropped by Radicals, is once more -heard in the land. - -The great contention of Ernest Jones and the Chartists that political -liberty should precede the granting of reforms by parliament, that the -people should have the power to control and direct the deliberations of -parliaments still has its advocates; but government is passing--almost -unnoticed--once more into the hands of an executive, for that “eternal -vigilance” which is the price of political liberty is oftentimes -relaxed. - - - - -Conclusion - - - - -CONCLUSION - - -Two political movements may be noted to-day in Great Britain by all -who are interested in such things: the Labour movement and the Women’s -movement for political enfranchisement. - -The efforts of the past twenty-five years to establish a separate -socialist party in parliament have not been directly successful, but -the Labour Party has managed to return a group of some thirty workmen -to the House of Commons, and these men are the responsible and trusted -leaders of the trade-unions and the Independent Labour Party. Without -requiring any formal acknowledgment of socialist belief, the Labour -Party is largely inspired by socialist teaching, and its goal is -the conquest of government by the labouring people, and a more even -distribution of wealth by the gradual expropriation of the landlord and -the capitalist. While adhering strictly to constitutional methods of -agitation, giving full respect to the procedure of parliament and the -legal conduct of elections, the leaders of the Labour Party, in their -speeches at public meetings, use much of the old revolutionary talk -of John Ball and Robert Ket, and the arguments of Winstanley for the -popular ownership of the land. To the Labour Party as to the Chartists -democratic politics are but a stepping-stone to social reform, and as -in the days of the Chartists the strength of the Labour Party is in -the industrial districts of the North of England, and in South Wales. - -The Women’s movement, on the other hand, while demanding nothing but -the right to the franchise, and claiming this right to a voice in -the affairs of the State on the old constitutional ground of Pym and -Hampden--that those who pay direct taxation to the government must have -some political control of the expenditure--boldly avows in the face of -government refusal the necessity for revolutionary methods to acquire -the franchise. More than 600 women have gone to prison in the last four -years in the cause of Women’s Suffrage, and the methods adopted have -startled the public, created an enthusiasm, and generally aroused the -attention of a formerly indifferent parliament to the claim of women to -political enfranchisement. - -Mary Wollstonecraft, in her _Vindication of the Rights of Women_, -published in 1792, struck the first note of this movement. In the -latter half of the nineteenth century it received the support of John -Stuart Mill and a certain number of parliamentary radicals, and Women’s -Suffrage societies were formed. Then, five years ago, the Women’s -Social and Political Union was started at Manchester by Mrs. Pankhurst -and her daughter Miss Christabel Pankhurst, and the extraordinary -energy and activity of this union and the daring and resource of its -members have made the women’s demand for the vote a vital question in -politics. - -Both these movements--the agitation of the Labour Party for a fuller -and more abundant life for wage-earners, and the agitation of the -women for political enfranchisement are proceeding in our midst--a -guarantee that the centuries of struggle for freedom are not fruitless. - -“The battle of freedom is never done and the field never quiet,” and -while ever sun and moon endure and man seeks to dominate his neighbour, -so long in England shall men and women be found to resist such -dominance. For “to meet such troubles and overcome them, or to die in -strife with them--this is a great part of a man’s life.” - - -THE END. - - - - -FOOTNOTES - - -[1] “By the mouth of the clergy spoke the voice of the helpless, -defenceless multitudes who shared with them in the misery of living in -a time when law was the feeblest and most untrustworthy stay of right, -and men held everything at the mercy of masters, who had many desires -and less scruples, were quickly and fiercely quarrelsome, impatient -of control, superiority and quiet, and simply indifferent to the -suffering, the fear, the waste that make bitter the days when society -is enslaved to the terrible fascination of the sword.”--Church, _Saint -Anselm_. - -“Unrestrained by religion, by principle or by policy, with no family -interests to limit his greed, extravagance and hatred of his kind, a -foul incarnation of selfishness in its most abhorrent form, the enemy -of God and man, William Rufus gave to England and Christendom a pattern -of absolutism.”--Stubbs, _Constitutional History_. Vol. I. - -[2] No Archbishop of Canterbury has received the pallium since Cranmer, -but the sign of it remains in the archiepiscopal arms of Canterbury. - -[3] “No one in those days imagined Christianity without Christendom, -and Christendom without a Pope: and all these bishops understood -exactly as Anselm did the favourite papal text, ‘Thou art Peter, and -on this rock I will build my Church.’ Nobody in those days doubted the -divine authority of the Pope.”--Church, _Saint Anselm_. - -[4] “The boldness of Anselm’s attitude not only broke the tradition of -ecclesiastical servitude, but infused through the nation at large a new -spirit of independence.”--J. R. Green. - -[5] “When in Anglo-Norman times you speak of the ‘King’s Court,’ it is -only a phrase for the king’s despotism.”--Sir F. Palgrave, _History of -Normandy and England_. - -[6] “The see of St. Peter was the acknowledged constitutional centre -of spiritual law in the West.... It was looked upon as the guide and -regulator of teaching, the tribunal and court from which issued the -oracles of right and discipline, the judgment seat to which an appeal -was open to all, and which gave sentence on wrong and vice without -fear or favour, without respect of persons, even the highest and -the mightiest.... If ever there was a time when the popes honestly -endeavoured to carry out the idea of their office, it was just at this -period of the Middle Ages. They attempted to erect an independent -throne of truth and justice above the passions and the force which -reigned in the world around.”--Church, _Saint Anselm_. - -“Under the rule of William the Red, law had become unlaw, and in -appealing from him to the apostolic throne Anselm might deem he was -appealing from mere force and fraud to the only shadow of right that -was still left on earth.”--Freeman, _Norman Conquest_, Vol. V. - -[7] “In England Anselm had stood only for right and liberty; he, the -chief witness for religion and righteousness, saw all round him vice -rampant, men spoiled of what was their own--justice, decency, honour -trampled under foot. Law was unknown, except to ensnare and oppress. -The King’s Court was the instrument of one man’s selfish and cruel -will, and of the devices of a cunning and greedy minister. The natural -remedies of wrong were destroyed and corrupted; the king’s peace, the -king’s law, the king’s justice, to which men in those days looked for -help, could only be thought of in mocking contrast to the reality. -Against this energetic reign of misrule and injustice, a resistance -as energetic was wanted; and to resist it was felt to be the call and -bounden duty of a man in Anselm’s place. He resisted, as was the way -in those days, man to man, person to person, in outright fashion and -plain-spoken words. He resisted lawlessness, wickedness, oppression, -corruption. When others acquiesced in the evil state, he refused; and -further, he taught a lesson which England has since largely learned, -though in a very different way. He taught his generation to appeal from -force and arbitrary will to law. It was idle to talk of appealing to -law in England; its time had not yet come.”--Church, _Saint Anselm_. - -[8] “No discipline restrained them (the king’s attendants); they -plundered, they devastated, they destroyed. What they found in the -houses which they invaded and could not consume, they took to market to -sell for themselves or they burnt it. If it was liquor they would bathe -the feet of their horses in it or pour it on the ground. It shames -me to recall the cruelties they inflicted on the fathers of families -and the insults on their wives and daughters. And so, whenever the -king’s coming was known beforehand, people fled from their houses and -hid themselves and their goods, as far as they could, in the woods or -wherever safety might be found.”--Eadmer. - -[9] “If the Church had continued to buttress the thrones of the king’s -whom it annointed, or if the struggle had terminated in an undivided -victory, all Europe would have sunk down under a Byzantine or Muscovite -despotism.”--Acton, _History of Freedom in Christianity_. - -[10] “By the surrender of the significant ceremony of delivering the -bishopric by the emblematic staff and ring, it was emphatically put -on record that the spiritual powers of the bishop were not the king’s -to give; the prescription of feudalism was broken.”--Church, _Saint -Anselm_. - -[11] “With regard to Thomas’ dealings with the Church, if one thing -is clear it is this--that he was not in the least a man who pushed -his Order at the expense of his loyalty. More than once he refused to -listen to an ecclesiastical claim against the king, even when his old -friend Theobald was behind it: he was perfectly impartial: he taxed -churchmen as he taxed laymen, and in fact, so loyal and reasonable -was he that Henry, when he made him archbishop, seems to have thought -that he was wholly on his side. There were innumerable questions to be -decided between Church and State. Again and again small points came up -as to the appointment of this man or the other, as to the infliction -or remission of a fine; and again and again Thomas decided the cause -and advised the king on the merits of the case.... He was as zealous -now for the State as he was for the Church afterwards. There he stood -Chancellor of England; his business was to administer the laws, and he -knew and did his business.”--R. H. Benson, _St. Thomas of Canterbury_. - -[12] “The only instance which has occurred of the chancellorship being -voluntarily resigned either by layman or ecclesiastic.”--Campbell, -_Lives of the Chancellors_. - -[13] “It must be held in mind that the archbisholp had on his side the -Church or _Canon Law_, which he had sworn to obey, and certainly the -law courts erred as much on the side of harshness and cruelty as those -of the Church on that of foolish pity towards evil-doers.”--F. York -Powell. - -“We have to take ourselves back to a state of society in which a -judicial trial was a tournament, and the ordeal an approved substitute -for evidence, to realise what civilization owes to the Canon Law -and the canonists, with their elaborate system of written law, -their judicial evidence, and their written procedure.”--Rashdall, -_Universities of Europe during the Middle Ages_. - -[14] W. H. Hutton. - -[15] This conversation is reported by Roger of Pontigny, who ministered -to St. Thomas when the latter was in exile at that place. - -[16] Garnier was a poet, and he protests passionately against this law, -maintaining that God has called us all to His service. Much more worth -is the villein’s son who is honourable than a nobleman’s son who is -false. - -[17] W. FitzStephen. - -[18] W. FitzStephen. - -[19] Dean Stanley. - -[20] Freeman, _Historical Essays_. First series. - -[21] “Hubert was very gracious in the eyes of all the host that lay -before Acre, and in warlike things so magnificent that he was admired -even by King Richard. He was in stature tall, in council prudent, and -though not having the gift of eloquence, he was an able and shrewd wit. -His mind was more on human than divine things, and he knew all the laws -of the realm.”--Gervase. - -[22] It is notable that in our day only peerages and knighthoods are -sold, and these by political leaders to their partisans. Government -offices, the judicial bench and bishoprics are still fortunately not in -the market, though frequently allotted for partisan reasons. - -[23] “Owing to the craft of the richer citizens the main part of the -burden fell on the poor.”--Matthew Paris. - -[24] Some writers say 50,000. - -[25] William of Newburgh. - -[26] “Hubert, Archbishop of Canterbury, was a shrewd financier, and -an honourable, conscientious statesman; but as a prelate he is noted -chiefly for his quarrels with his chapter.”--W. H. Hutton, _Social -England_. - -[27] Matthew Paris. - -[28] “If he was to give up all for which he had been fighting, and -fighting successfully, against the pope and the Church for the past six -years, he must make quite sure of gaining such an advantage as would be -worth the sacrifice. Mere release from excommunication and interdict -was certainly, in his eyes, not worth any sacrifice at all. To change -the pope from an enemy into a political friend was worth it, but--from -John’s point of view--only if the friendship could be made something -much more close and indissoluble than the ordinary official relation -between the pope and every Christian sovereign. He must bind the pope -to his personal interest by some special tie of such a nature that the -interest of the papacy itself would prevent Innocent from casting it -off or breaking it.... To outward personal humiliation of any kind John -was absolutely indifferent, when there was any advantage to be gained -by undergoing it. To any humiliation which the crown or the nation -might suffer in his person, he was indifferent under all circumstances. -His plighted faith he had never had a moment’s hesitation in breaking, -whether it were sworn to his father, his brother, his allies or his -people, and he would break it with equal facility when sworn to the -supreme pontiff.... There seems, in short, to be good reason for -believing that John’s homage to the pope was offered without any -pressure from Rome and on grounds of deliberate policy.”--K. Norgate, -_John Lackland_. - -[29] K. Norgate, _John Lackland_. - -[30] “By the intervention of the Archbishop of Canterbury, with several -of his bishops and some barons, a sort of peace (_quasi pax_) was made -between the king and the barons.”--Ralph of Coggeshall. - -[31] Matthew Paris, _Greater Chronicle_, quoted by K. Norgate. - -[32] “The Charter was a treaty between two powers neither of -which trusted, or even pretended to trust, the other.”--Stubbs, -_Constitutional History_. Vol. II. - -[33] Luard. Preface to _Grosseteste’s Letters_. Rolls’ Series. 1861. - -[34] A well-known passage in Matthew Paris, vol. v, gives the monk’s -point of view of Grosseteste, the reformer:--“At this time the Bishop -of Lincoln made a visitation of the religious houses in the diocese. -If one were to tell all the acts of tyranny he committed therein, the -bishop would seem not merely unfeeling but inhuman in his severity. -For amongst other things when he came to Ramsey he went round the -whole place, examined each one of the monks’ beds in the dormitory, -scrutinized everything, and if he found anything locked up destroyed -it. He broke open the monks’ coffers as a thief would, and if he found -any cups wrought with decoration and with feet to stand on he broke -them to pieces, though it would have been wiser to have demanded them -unbroken for the poor. He also heaped the terrible curses of Moses on -the heads of those who disobeyed his injunctions and the blessings -of Moses on those who should observe the same.... And it is believed -all this he hath done to restrain from sin those over whom he hath -authority, and for whose souls he must give account.” This was written -in 1251, when Grosseteste had been sixteen years at Lincoln. - -[35] Wright, _Political Songs_. Camden Society, 1839. - -[36] Grosseteste had been unable to get his way with the barons on -the question of legitimacy of children before legal wedlock. By the -old church law marriage made such children legitimate, and at the -council of Merton, in 1236, Grosseteste, with the bishops, tried to -bring the common law into union with the church view on this matter. -He was defeated, and to this day these children are illegitimate. “It -would indeed have been better if the independence exhibited by the -majority who opposed the prelates at Merton had been reserved for -another occasion; for it cannot be deemed that the perpetuation of a -law contrary to that which prevails on the subject in almost every -European country, and which still differentiates Scotland from England -by abroad, though unintelligible line of demarcation, has been open -to grave objection on grounds of public convenience, apart from any -inherent merits or demerits it may possess.”--F. S. Stevenson, _Robert -Grosseteste_. - -[37] “Grosseteste, then, may be regarded in a threefold aspect; first, -as a reformer who sought to reform the Church from within and not -from without, by the removal of existing abuses, by the encouragement -he gave to the great religious revival of the early part of the 13th -century, and by the example of unflinching fearlessness and rectitude -which he set in his performance of the episcopal office; secondly, -as the teacher who guided the rising fortunes of the University of -Oxford; and thirdly, as the statesman who, applying to new conditions -the policy associated with the name of Stephen Langton, endeavoured to -combine into one effort the struggle of the clergy for the liberties -of the Church with the struggle of the laity for the liberties of -the nation, imbued Simon de Montfort with principles of ‘truth and -justice’ which went far beyond the mere maintenance of the privileges -of his own order, and at the same time, by his effort to reconcile him -with his sovereign, and by the whole tenour of his actions, showed -that had he lived a few years longer, his influence would have been -directed to the task of achieving by peaceful means the constitutional -advance brought about by those who, taking the sword, perished by the -sword.”--Stevenson, _Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln_. - -[38] See recent article on “Grosseteste” in _Catholic Encyclopædia_. - -[39] Yet out of this letter and out of his great knowledge and love -of the Scriptures a notion has been current that Grosseteste was a -forerunner of Protestantism, and “a harbinger of the Reformation.” “If -this implies that he had any tendency towards the doctrinal changes -brought about in the Church at the Reformation, or that he evidenced -any idea of a separation of the Church of England from that of Rome, a -more utterly mistaken statement has never been made.”--Luard, Preface -to _Grosseteste’s Letters_. (Rolls Series.) - -As for Grosseteste’s Scriptural knowledge, “The thorough familiarity -with the Old Testament is, perhaps, only what we might expect; but the -use which is made of the actions of all the characters of Scripture, -and the forced and sometimes outrageous way in which they are -introduced to illustrate his argument, show how thoroughly ‘biblical’ -the age was, and how completely the Old Testament history was regarded -rather as the guide of men’s conduct in Christian times, than as a mere -historical record of past events.”--_Ibid._ - -[40] “The king acted as if he had sent him abroad simply to ruin his -fortunes and wreck his reputation.”--Stubbs. - -[41] Matthew Paris. - -[42] Rishanger, the chronicler for St. Albans, puts the case for the -national party:-- - - “The king that tries without advice to seek his people’s weal - Must often fail, he cannot know the wants and woes they feel. - The Parliament must tell the king how he may serve them best, - And he must see their wants fulfilled and injuries redressed. - A king should seek his people’s good and not his own sweet will, - Nor think himself a slave because men hold him back from ill. - - For they that keep the king from sin serve him the best of all, - Making him free that else would be to sin a wretched thrall. - True king is he, and truly free, who rules himself aright, - And chooses freely what he knows will ease his people’s plight. - Think not it is the king’s goodwill that makes the law to be, - For law is steadfast, and a king has no stability. - No! law stands high above the king, for law is that true light - Without whose ray the king would stray and wander from the right. - When a king strays he ought to be called back into the way - By those he rules, who lawfully his will may disobey - Until he seeks the path, but when his wandering is o’er, - They ought to help and succour him and love him as before.” - - (Translated by F. York Powell.) - - -[43] “The new form of government bears evidence of its origin; it is -intended rather to fetter the king than to extend or develop the action -of the community at large. The baronial council clearly regards itself -as competent to act on behalf of all the estates of the realm, and the -expedient of reducing the national deliberations to three sessions -of select committees, betrays a desire to abridge the frequent and -somewhat irksome duty of attendance in parliament rather than to share -the central legislative and deliberative power with the whole body of -the people. It must however be remembered that the scheme makes a very -indistinct claim to the character of a final arrangement.”--Stubbs. - -[44] A board of twenty-four--half chosen by the king and half by the -barons--had laid a body of resolutions before the Oxford Parliament, -and the first of these resolutions declared that all castles and -estates alienated from the crown should be at once resumed. - -[45] “The first time, as far as we know, English was used in any public -document.”--Blaauw, _The Barons’ War_. - -[46] - - “End, O Earl of Gloster, what thou hast begun! - Save thou end it fitly, we are all undone. - Play the man, we pray thee, as thou hast promised, - Cherish steadfastly the cause of which thou wast the head. - He that takes the Lord’s work up, and lays it down again, - Shamed and cursed may he be, and all shall say Amen. - - Earl Simon, thou of Montfort, so powerful and brave, - Bring up thy strong companies thy country now to save, - Have thou no fear of menaces or terrors of the grave, - Defend with might the nation’s cause, naught else thine own - needs crave.” - - --Rishanger, _Political Songs_. - - -[47] Stubbs. - -[48] “The Song of Lewes”--_Political Songs_. - -[49] I am indebted to my friend Fr. Bede Jarrett, O.P., for this -interesting and, I believe, hitherto unpublished suggestion. - -[50] It was to a Dominican Convent at Montargis that Simon’s widow, the -Princess Eleanor, retired after the fatal battle of Evesham. - -[51] An appeal was lodged at Rome by several English bishops against -the threatened excommunication, but the papal legate himself became -pope early in 1265, and, as Pope Clement V., was the strongest enemy of -Simon and the national cause. It was only after Evesham and the death -of Simon that Clement urged a wise policy of mercy on Henry and the -royalists. - -[52] “In this year, while Edward, the king’s son, was still held in -ward in the Castle of Hereford, dissension arose between Simon, Earl of -Leicester, and Gilbert, Earl of Gloucester.... - -“For which cause the old friendship was turned into hate, so much so -that neither the consideration of his oath nor former devotion could -thenceforth pacify the said Gilbert.... An endeavour was made by -certain prelates to restore the Earls of Leicester and Gloucester to -their former union; but they could in no wise succeed.”--W. Rishanger. - -[53] J. R. Green, “The Ban of Kenilworth,” _Historical Studies_. - -[54] “The triumph over Earl Simon had been a triumph over the religious -sentiment of the time, and religion avenged itself in its own way. -Everywhere the earl’s death was viewed as a martyrdom, and monk and -friar, however they might quarrel on other points, united in praying -for the souls of the dead as for ‘soldiers of Christ.’”--J. R. Green, -“The Ban of Kenilworth,” _Historical Studies_. - -[55] _Chronicles of Melrose._ - -[56] _Ibid._ - -[57] Wright, _Political Songs_. - -[58] See J. R. Green, “Annals of Osney and Wykes,” _Historical Studies_. - -[59] “The project was clearly to set up a new order of things -founded on social equality--a theory which in the whole history of -the Middle Ages appears for the first time in connection with this -movement.”--Gairdner. - -[60] It may be said that to-day the idea of political and social -equality is generally accepted and that of brotherhood denied. In -the fourteenth century brotherhood was esteemed, but equality was a -strange, intruding notion. - -[61] “The bias of Wyclif in theory and practice is secular, and -aristocratic, and royalist: it is not really socialistic or politically -revolutionary,”--Figgis, _Studies of Political Thought_. Nevertheless, -many writers have tried to discredit Lollardy by associating it with -social revolt, just as others have tried to discredit John Ball by -making him out a “heretic,” and a follower of Wycliff. - -[62] Froissart seems to be mainly responsible for the belief that this -John Tyler became the great leader of the movement, confusing him with -Wat Tyler, of Maidstone, the real leader. Several writers allege the -indecency of the tax-collectors. - -[63] “Tyler, according to Walsingham, was a man of ready ability and -good sense. Save in some excesses, which, perhaps, were politic, -possibly unavoidable, and certainly exaggerated, the rebels under him -are admitted to have kept good order, and to have readily submitted to -discipline.”--Thorold Rogers. To Froissart Tyler appears merely as “a -bad man, and a great enemy of the nobility.” - -[64] “Fearful lest their voyage should be prevented, or that the -populace should attack them, they heaved their anchors and with some -difficulty left the harbour, for the wind was against them, and put to -sea, when they cast anchor for a wind.”--Froissart. - -[65] Two names at least have been preserved--Squire Bertram Wilmington -of Wye and John Corehurst of Lamberhurst. - -[66] Seven years later this Earl of Salisbury, fleeing from Henry -Bolingbroke, was hanged in the streets of Cirencester at the hands of -the people. - -[67] This law of Winchester was the statute of Edward I., 1285, which -authorised local authorities to appoint constables and preserve the -peace. Tyler’s aim was to strengthen local government in the counties, -making them as far as possible self-governing communes. - -[68] “It was in the preaching of John Ball that England first listened -to the knell of feudalism, and the declaration of the rights of -man.”--J. R. Green. - -[69] “Observe how fortunate matters turned out, for had the rebels -succeeded in their intentions they would have destroyed the whole -nobility of England, and after their success other countries would have -rebelled.”--Froissart. - -[70] See Durrant Cooper--_John Cade’s Followers in Kent_. - -[71] “These two bishops were wonder covetous men, evil beloved among -the common people and holden suspect of many defaults; assenting and -willing to the death of the Duke of Gloucester, as it were said.”--(_A -Chronicle of Henry VI_). According to Gasgoigne--_Loci e Libro -Veritatum_--the people said of Ayscough: “He always kept with the king -and was his confessor, and did not reside in his own diocese of Sarum -with us, nor maintain hospitality.” - -[72] “He himself asserted that he had been a captain under the Duke -of York, and that his real name was Mortimer, which may possibly have -been true, for there were several illegitimate branches of the house of -March.”--Professor Oman, _Political History of England_. - -[73] “A young man of a godly nature and right pregnant of -wit.”--Holinshed. Shakspeare’s farcical account of the rising in _King -Henry VI._, Part II., is, of course, entirely misleading.--See the -author’s _True Story of Jack Cade_. - -[74] See the letter of John Payn in the _Paston Letters_. But Payn -wrote fifteen years afterwards, and seems to have been a person of no -very scrupulous honesty. - -[75] A special act of parliament was passed in 1452 to cancel all that -Cade had accomplished. - -[76] Cocke was a well-known supporter of Henry VI. and a man of note. -He was sheriff of London 1453, alderman in 1456, and mayor and M.P. -1462–3. Knighted by Henry in 1465, he fell from his high estate when -Edward IV. was king, and languished in prison on a charge of high -treason, only escaping with his life on payment of £8,000. - -[77] “What answer to this demand was returned I find not, but like -it is the same was granted and performed; for I find not the said -captain and Kentishmen at their being in the city to have hurt any -stranger.”--Stow. - -[78] When, by order of the Privy Council, the Exchequer seized all -Cade’s goods, these jewels were sold with the rest. They fetched £114, -and a payment of £86 7s. was subsequently made to the Duke of York. -So the crown made some profit on the transaction, but Malpas was -unrecompensed.--See Devon’s _Exchequer Rolls_. - -[79] “Whereof he lost the people’s favour and hearts. For it was to be -thought if he had not executed that robbery he might have gone far and -brought his purpose to good effect.”--Fabyan. - -[80] This church has long been pulled down. It was absorbed into St. -Saviour’s parish the following year. St. Margaret’s Hill is now part of -High Street, Borough, and the present St. George’s Church stands near -the site of old St. Margaret’s Church. - -[81] _Acts of Privy Council_, 1451. - -[82] “In the interests of truth, I must declare at the outset that -I cannot find the very slightest foundation for the assertion of -Stapleton, copied by Cresacre More and many others, that in the course -of time their friendship cooled. Abundant proofs of the contrary will -appear.”--Rev. T. E. Bridgett, _Life and Writings of Sir Thomas More_. - -[83] “Indeed, it was he who pushed me to write the _Praise of Folly_, -that is to say, he made a camel frisk.”--Erasmus to Ulrich von Hutten, -1519. - -[84] “He had a purpose to be a priest, yet God had allotted him for -another estate, not to live solitary, but that he might be a pattern -to married men: how they should carefully bring up their children, -how dearly they should love their wives, how they should employ their -endeavour wholly for the good of their country, yet excellently perform -the virtues of religious men, as piety, charity, humility, obedience -and conjugal chastity.”--Cresacre More. - -[85] Erasmus to Ulrich von Hutten. - -[86] “It is clear that Sir Thomas had a little Utopia of his own in his -family. He was making an experiment in education, and he was delighted -with its success. The fame of his learned daughters became European -through the praises of Erasmus, and was so great in England that in -1529, when they were all married ladies, they were invited by the -king to hold a kind of philosophical tournament in his presence.... -More will ever stand foremost in the ranks of the defenders of female -culture.”--Rev. T. E. Bridgett, _Life and Writings of Sir Thomas More_. - -[87] “He most warily retired from every opposition but that which -conscience absolutely required. He displayed that very peculiar -excellence of his character, which, as it showed his submission to be -the fruit of sense of duty, gave dignity to that which in others is apt -to seem to be slavish.”--Sir James Mackintosh, _Life of More_. - -[88] “Parliament is discussing the revocation of all synods and other -constitutions of the English clergy, and the prohibition of holding -synods without express license of the king. This is a strange thing. -Churchmen will be of less account than shoemakers, who have the power -of assembling and making their own statutes.”--Chapuys, _Letters and -Papers of Henry VIII._ (Rolls Series). - -[89] Chapuys, _Letters and Papers of Henry VIII._ (Rolls Series). - -[90] _Lives of the Chancellors._ - -[91] _Letters and Papers of Henry VIII._ (Rolls Series). - -[92] Roper. - -[93] “To More a heretic was neither a simple man erring by ignorance, -nor a learned man using his freedom in doubtful points: he was a man -whose heart was ‘proud, poisoned, and obstinate,’ because he denied -the Divine guidance of the Church while he claimed special Divine -inspiration for himself.”--Rev. T. E. Bridgett. - -[94] More’s _English Works--Apology_. It is only thirty years after his -death that Foxe suggests More as a persecutor. All the evidence is in -the opposite direction. - -[95] Sir James Mackintosh, _Life of More_. - -[96] See Dr. Jessop, _The Great Pillage_. - -[97] _See State Papers, Domestic, Edward VI._ - -[98] The common lands engrossed in the 15th and 16th centuries were the -farm lands cultivated in common by the peasants. The enclosure of the -commons was left to a later date, and took place between 1760 and 1830. - -[99] This Flowerdew had distinguished himself at the destruction of -the abbey at Wymondham by Henry VIII., by tearing off the lead from -the roof of the church and pulling down the choir, for the sake of the -stones, after the people had raised a large sum of money for the king -in order to save the church. - -[100] “By bearing a confident countenance in all his actions the -vulgars took him (Ket) to be both valiant and wise and a fit man to be -their commander.”--Sir John Hayward, _Life of Edward VI._ - -“This Ket was a proper person to be a ringleader of mischief, for he -was of a bold, haughty spirit, and of a cankered mind against the -Government.”--John Strype, _Ecclesiastical Memorials_. - -[101] These two “were partly fain to agree, lest they being out of -favour and place, others might come to bring all out of frame that -now might partly be well framed, and the rather they assented to keep -the people in better order during answer from the prince.”--Nicholas -Sutherton. - -[102] “That a populous and wealthy city like Norwich should have been -for three weeks in the hands of 20,000 rebels, and should have escaped -utter pillage and ruin speaks highly for the rebel leaders.”--W. Rye, -_Victoria County History of Norfolk_. - -[103] A few years later, and John Dudley, Earl of Warwick, now -Duke of Northumberland, again visited East Anglia to proclaim his -daughter-in-law, Lady Jane Grey, Queen of England. No one rose at his -call. Neither peasant nor landowner responded to the proclamation; -and John Dudley, Earl of Warwick and Duke of Northumberland, died, as -his father before him had died, convicted of treason, beheaded by the -executioner’s axe on Tower Hill. It was August 22nd, 1553, just four -years after the suppression of the peasants’ rising in Norfolk when -Northumberland was put to death. - -[104] “Robert Ket was not a mere craftsman: he was a man of substance, -the owner of several manors: his conduct throughout was marked by -considerable generosity: nor can the name of patriot be denied to him -who deserted the class to which he might have belonged or aspired, and -cast in his lot with the suffering people.”--Canon Dixon, _History of -the Church of England_. - -In 1588 a grandson of Robert Ket was burnt as a Nonconformist heretic -by order of Elizabeth. - -[105] The three were Oxford men. Sir John Eliot was at Exeter (1607), -Hampden at Magdalen (1609) and Pym at Broadgate Hall, afterwards called -Pembroke (1599). - -[106] “In Eliot’s composition there was nothing of the dogmatic -orthodoxy of Calvinism, nothing of the painful introspection of the -later Puritans. His creed, as it shines clearly out from the work of -his prison hours, as death was stealing upon him--_The Monarchy of -Man_--was the old heathen philosophic creed, mellowed and spiritualised -by Christianity. Between such a creed and Rome there was a great gulf -fixed. Individual culture and the nearest approach to individual -perfection for the sake of the State and the Church, formed a common -ground on which Eliot could stand with the narrowest Puritan.”--S. R. -Gardiner. - -[107] Eliot’s argument “was a claim to render ministerial -responsibility once more a reality, and thereby indirectly to make -parliament supreme.”--S. R. Gardiner. - -[108] “He (Eliot) was to the bottom of his heart an idealist. To him -the parliament was scarcely a collection of fallible men, just as the -king was hardly a being who could by any possibility go deliberately -astray. If he who wore the crown had wandered from the right path, he -had but to listen to those who formed, in more than a rhetorical sense, -the collective wisdom of the nation.”--S. R. Gardiner. - -[109] “His (Hampden’s) distinction lay in his power of disentangling -the essential part from the non-essential. In the previous -constitutional struggle he had seen that the one thing necessary was to -establish the supremacy of the House of Commons.”--S. R. Gardiner. - -[110] Clarendon. - -[111] “The same men who, six months before, were observed to be of very -moderate tempers, and to wish that gentle remedies might be applied, -talked now in another dialect both of kings and persons; and said -that they must now be of another temper than they were in the last -parliament.”--Clarendon. - -[112] The Nineteen Propositions fairly express the views of Pym -and Hampden at this time on the supremacy of the Commons. The main -proposals were the authority of parliament: in the _sole_ choice of -the ministers of the crown, in the regulation of state policy, in the -management of the militia, in the education of the royal children, in -the remodeling of the discipline of the Church of England; and the -guardianship by parliament of all forts and castles. It was of first -importance in Pym’s mind that parliament should have the control in -military matters. Without the power of the sword the House of Commons -could not ensure the personal safety of its members or the privileges -of free debate against the enmity of the king. To command the army was -to govern the country. - -[113] See G. P. Gooch, _History of Democratic Ideas in the Seventeenth -Century_. - -[114] “By its injudicious treatment of the most popular man in England, -parliament was arraying against itself a force which only awaited an -opportunity to sweep it away.”--G. P. Gooch, _History of Democratic -Ideas in the Seventeenth Century_. - -[115] “Advocating direct government by a democratic Parliament and -the fullest development of individual liberty, the Levellers looked -with suspicion on the Council of State as a body which might possibly -be converted into an executive authority independent of parliament, -and thoroughly distrusted Cromwell as aiming at military despotism. -Well-intentioned and patriotic as they were, they were absolutely -destitute of political tact, and had no sense of the real difficulties -of the situation, and, above all, of the impossibility of rousing the -popular sympathy on behalf of abstract reasonings.”--S. R. Gardiner, -_History of the Commonwealth and Protectorate_. - -[116] S. R. Gardiner. - -[117] The movement “had sprung into existence in response to a widely -spread apprehension that the victory of the people might be rendered -fruitless. Its call had found an echo in the ranks of the army, and by -its admirable organization it had insisted that the leaders should hear -what it had to say. It had powerfully influenced their conduct and had -introduced a radical element into their programme. When this had been -done, the soldiers felt that its _raison d’être_ as a separate party -had come to an end. The battle had been fought, and the victory, at -least for the time, had fallen to Ireton.”--G. P. Gooch, _History of -Democratic Ideas in the Seventeenth Century_. - -[118] “In other words, not only Cromwell and Ireton, but also Fairfax, -who had recently been elected a member of the House, were to be -summarily cashiered.”--S. R. Gardiner, _History of the Commonwealth_. - -[119] See the pamphlet “A Petition of Well-affected Women,” 1649. There -is something curiously familiar in the exhortation to the women. - -[120] “Unfortunately his friends, in petitioning for his release, -rested their case on the ground that all sentences given by a -court-martial were made illegal by the Petition of Right and the law -of the land. Such a doctrine would have dissolved the army into chaos, -and when Lilburne and Overton wrote to Fairfax, threatening him with -the fate of Joab and Strafford, all chance of pardon was at an end. -Lockyer firmly believed himself to be a martyr to the cause of right -and justice.”--S. R. Gardiner, _History of the Commonwealth_. - -[121] See Whitelocke’s _Memorials_, “The Army’s Martyr,” “A True -Narrative,” and “The Moderate” (1649). - -[122] “So die the Leveller corporals. Strong they, after their sort, -for the liberties of England; resolute to the very death.”--Carlyle. - -[123] Lilburne’s attitude to Winstanley’s propaganda was similar to -the attitude of the political Chartists in the 19th century to Robert -Owen’s socialism. - -[124] “Then ensued a scene, the like of which had in all probability -never been witnessed in an English court of justice, and was never -again to be witnessed till the seven bishops were freed by the verdict -of a jury from the rage of James II.”--S. R. Gardiner. - -“In a revolution, where others argued about the respective rights of -king and parliament, he spoke always of the rights of the people. His -dauntless courage and his power of speech made him the idol of the -mob.”--Professor C. H. Firth, “Lilburne,” _Dictionary of National -Biography_. - -[125] See L. A. Berens, _Digger Movement in the Days of the -Commonwealth_. - -[126] _Clarke Papers_, vol. ii. - -[127] Government rarely distinguishes between different schools of -agitators. - -[128] Between 1710 and 1867 the number of acres so enclosed was -7,660,439. - -[129] _Clarke Papers_, vol. ii. - -[130] See Graham Wallas, _Life of Francis Place_. - -[131] “Disappointment bitter and wide-spread was following closely upon -the inevitable failure of the extravagant expectations and overheated -hopes which the agitation for parliamentary reform had kindled.”--F. -York Powell, _The Queen’s Reign: a Survey_. - -[132] See Graham Wallas, _Life of Francis Place_. - -[133] Herbert Paul, _History of Modern England_. - -[134] _Ibid._ - -[135] “Want of leaders and organization, and the great difference in -objects among the Chartists themselves, led to their failure. For a -while Chartism was stayed.”--Professor T. F. Tout, _England from 1689_. - -[136] The differences between the two became more acute when Feargus -O’Connor started his land colonization schemes a few years later. -O’Brien opposed these schemes, which all ended in heavy financial -losses, and urged sticking to political reform. From 1842 O’Brien was -practically outside the Chartist movement, though it was not till 1848 -he formally retired. He died in poverty in 1864, after giving some help -to the middle-class radical movement for household suffrage. - -[137] A similar impulse fifty years later brought “Labour Churches” -into existence. - -[138] “The ministers had met the Chartist outbreaks with strong, -repressive measures, and here they had the concurrence of parliament, -which had no sympathy with the movement. The House of Commons, -indeed, had little understanding of the processes that were maturing -outside its walls. The industrial and the social evolution went on -almost unnoticed by statesmen and politicians absorbed in the party -controversy.”--Sidney Low and Lloyd Sanders, _Political History of -England_, 1837–1901. See also Hansard’s _Parliamentary Debates_ for -these years. - -[139] “The least satisfactory feature of English life in 1846 was the -condition of the labouring classes. Politically they were dumb, for -they had no parliamentary votes. Socially they were depressed, though -their lot had been considerably improved by an increased demand for -labour and by the removal of taxes in Peel’s great Budget of 1842. That -was the year in which the misery of the English proletariat reached its -lowest depth.”--Herbert Paul, _History of Modern England_. - -[140] Stephens, a “hot-headed” Chartist preacher, put the case as -he, a typical agitator of the day, saw it in 1839: “The principle of -the People’s Charter is the right of every man to have his home, his -hearth, and his happiness. The question of universal suffrage is after -all a knife-and-fork question. It means that every workman has a right -to have a good hat and coat, a good roof, a good dinner, no more work -than will keep him in health, and as much wages as will keep him in -plenty.”--See R. G. Gamage, _History of the Chartist Movement_. - -[141] Charles Kingsley, who is said to have signed the petition, gives -his view of April 10th in _Alton Locke_. - -[142] See Hansard, June, 1849. - - - - -INDEX - - - Adam of Marsh, Franciscan friar, friend of Grosseteste and - de Montfort, 120, 130 - - Aldrich, an Alderman of Norwich, 229, 231 - - Alexander III., Pope, 45, 56 - - Anselm, Abbot of Bec, 8; - called to court of William II., 8; - appointed Archbishop of Canterbury, 9; - refuses to give up church lands, 11; - firm attitude at Council of Rockingham, 15; - semblance of peace with the king, 16; - leaves England, 18; - returns at request of Henry I., 19; - his services to the king, 21; - dispute with the king, 23; - reconciliation, 26; - his death and character, 27–30; - his birthplace, 30 - - Appleton, William, 161 - - Ayscough, Bishop of Salisbury, impeached for treason, 174; - murdered at Erdington, 175 - - - Bailey, John, hanged by Cade, 184 - - Ball, John, itinerant priest from York, preaches social - revolution, 143; - released from Maidstone prison by Wat Tyler, 153; - preaches to Tyler’s followers at Blackheath, 153; - hanged as a rebel, 167 - - Barton, Elizabeth, “Holy Maid of Kent,” 206 - - Becket, Thomas, his parentage, 33; - early years, 34; - appointed Chancellor of Canterbury, 34; - ordained priest and appointed to Archbishopric, 38; - dispute with the king, 41–45; - yields to king’s demands at Council of Clarendon, 47; - refutes charges at Council of Northampton, 49; - leaves England and appeals to the pope, 55; - reconciliation with the king, 57; - lands at Sandwich, 57; - ill-will of the bishops, 58; - Henry’s sudden rage, 59; - his murder, 63; - his canonisation, 64 - - Belknap, Chief Justice, 147, 148 - - Berksted, Stephen, Bishop of Chichester, 128 - - Bigod, Hugh of Norfolk, 121 - - Bigod, Roger, 126 - - Boniface of Savoy, Archbishop of Canterbury, 110, 131 - - Bradshaw, John, 297 - - Buckingham, Duke of, 249, 250, 251, 252 - - Burdett, Sir Francis, 313 - - Burley, Sir Simon, 148, 163 - - - Cade, Jack, leader of the revolt of Kentish commons, 1450, 173; - uncertainty as to real name and family, 176; - marches to Blackheath at head of 46,000 followers, 177; - draws up and presents petition to Henry VI., 178; - no answer returned, 178; - withdraws to Sevenoaks and defeats small body of Henry’s - troops, 180; - gathers reinforcements in Kent, 181; - Henry VI. treats with him fruitlessly, 181; - enters London without opposition, 182; - preserves strict discipline in his force, 184; - forced to levy toll for support of his followers, 185; - after first good reception London turns against him, 187; - unsuccessful fight for London Bridge, 187; - treats with Henry’s representatives, 188; - many of his adherents return to their homes, 189; - refuses to lay down arms till parliament issues legal pardon, 189; - proclaimed a traitor, 189; - defeated at Queenborough, 189; - dies fighting as a fugitive, in Sussex, 189; - head exposed on London Bridge, 190 - - Cartwright, John, enters Navy and begins promising career, 308; - it is cut short by his siding with the Americans at outbreak of - war, 1776, 308; - trains the Nottinghamshire Militia, 309; - pioneer of political reform, 310; - writes and speaks on the subject, 310; - unsuccessful efforts to enter parliament, 312; - at age of 80 charged with sedition and fined, 313; - known as “Father of Reform,” 315 - - Catherine of Aragon, 203 - - Cantilupe, Bishop of Worcester, 122, 126, 133 - - Cantilupe, Thomas, Chancellor, 128 - - Cave, Robert, 148 - - Chalton, Sir John, Lord Mayor of London, 183 - - Charles I., 250 _et seq._, 280, 282 - - Church, Corporal, 286 - - Clarendon, Earl of (quoted), 262 - - Clarendon, Council of, 46 - - Clarkson, Thomas, 313 - - Cocke (or Cooke) Thomas, friend to both Henry VI. and Cade, 182 - - Cod, Thomas, Mayor of Norwich, 228, 229, 231, 232, 233 - - Coke, Lord Justice, 252 - - Colet, Dean of St. Paul’s, 199, 212 - - Conyers, Dr., Vicar of St. Martin, Norwich, 231 - - Cranmer, Archbishop, 204 - - Cromwell, Oliver, 279 _et seq._ - - Cromwell, Thomas, 208 - - Crowmer, Sheriff of Kent, 180; - arrested and sent to Tower, 181; - beheaded by Cade’s orders, 184 - - Curtis (Girste, or Ghirstis) City Merchant, 186 - - - De Burgh, Hubert, 95, 107 - - De Gray, John, Bishop of Norwich, 81, 82 - - De Morville, Hugh, 59–63 - - Derby, Henry, Earl of (afterwards Henry IV.), 157, 163, 170 - - Despenser, Henry, Bishop of Norwich, 168 - - Des Roches, Peter, Bishop of Winchester, 82, 94, 107, 108 - - De Tracy, William, 59–63 - - De Valence, William, 123, 132 - - - Eadmer (quoted), 6, 7, 14, 17, 26 - - Edward, Prince, son of Henry III., afterwards King-Edward I.; - takes oath of reform to barons, 123; - takes Gloucester in civil war, 126; - taken prisoner at Battle of Lewes, 127; - escapes to Welsh marshes, 132; - intercepts de Montfort’s relief force at Evesham, 133 - - Eliot, John, enters parliament as member for St. Germans, 249; - knighted and becomes Vice-Admiral of Devon, 249; - captures the pirate Nutt, but eventually finds himself in Marshalsea - prison over the affair, 250; - released and is returned for Newport, 1624, 250; - quarrels with Buckingham and insists upon his impeachment, 251; - imprisoned in Tower in connection therewith, but soon released, 251; - refuses forced loan and again imprisoned and deprived of - Vice-Admiralship, 252; - carries Petition of Right, 252; - attacks policy of Laud, 252; - supports John Rolle in refusing payment of taxes, 253; - summoned before Privy Council, imprisoned for fourth time, - and fined, 255; - remains passionately loyal to House of Commons, 256; - health gives way in confinement, 257; - dies in the Tower, 1632, 257; - his son’s appeal for his burial at Port Eliot, Cornwall, - refused, 257 - - Erasmus, 193, 194, 197, 202, 211, 212 - - Essex, Earl of, 267 - - Ethelmar, half-brother to Henry III., 106 - - Everard, 297, 298 - - - Fairfax, General, 298, 299 - - Falkland, Lord, 265, 266 - - Finch, Chief Justice, 262 - - Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, 206, 207, 208 - - FitzOsbert, William, called Longbeard; his early life, 72; - lays his grievances before Richard I., 72; - defies Archbishop Hubert, 73; - his arrest and death, 75 - - FitzStephen, W. (quoted), 35, 49, 53, 59 - - FitzUrse, Reginald, 59–63 - - Flowerdew, Sergeant, 222, 223 - - Frost, 321 - - Fulke, follower of Ket, 235 - - Fussell, 328 - - - Gilbert, Earl of Gloucester, 126, 128, 131, 132 - - Gough, Matthew, 186 - - Green, J. R. (quoted), 91, 92 - - Green, Squire of Wylby, 222 - - Gregory IX., Pope, letter to, from Grosseteste, 102 - - Grindcobbe, William, supporter of John Ball in Hertford, 143, 146; - follows Wat Tyler, 149; - at Mile End, 159; - hanged at St. Albans, 167 - - Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln, born in Suffolk of humble parentage, - goes to Oxford, rises to foremost honours there, and becomes - bishop, at sixty, 101; - institutes reforms at Oxford, 102; - befriends Dominican and Franciscan friars, 102; - withstands Henry III.’s rapacity, 104; - attends council in London, recites grievances of Henry III.’s - misrule, 107; - resists seizure of English Church revenues by Innocent IV., 108–111; - refuses canonry of Lincoln to pope’s nephew, 111; - Cardinals uphold Grosseteste against Innocent IV., 112; - makes appeal to whole realm on behalf of rights of English - Church, 113; - dies, 1235, and is buried in Lincoln Cathedral, 113; - Edward I.’s application for canonization refused, 113 - - Gunnell, Tutor in Sir Thomas More’s family, 199 - - - Hales, Sir Robert, Treasurer to Richard II., 146; - advises no conference with Tyler’s followers, 154; - beheaded on Tower Hill, 160 - - Hampden, John, refuses to pay ship-money, 258; - case decided against him, 259; - acts with Eliot against Buckingham, 261; - strong influence in House of Commons, 262; - prominent work in Long Parliament, 263; - impeached for high treason, 265; - takes refuge from Charles in city, 266; - prepares for war, 266; - raises regiment of infantry in Bucks, 267; - mortally wounded at Chalgrove, 268 - - Hazlerig, 265, 288 - - Henry I., 19–26 - - Henry II.; appoints Thomas Becket Chancellor of England, 34; - their close friendship, 35; - determines to appoint Thomas to the archbishopric, 36; - his dispute with Thomas, and its cause, 41; - draws up the Constitutions of Clarendon, 46; - his dissatisfaction with the result, 48; - charges Thomas with corrupt practices, 48–54; - his sudden rage and hasty words, resulting in the murder of the - archbishop, 63 - - Henry III.; appeals for money at Council of Westminster, 1244, 104; - confronts bishops with Innocent IV.’s letter exhorting them to give - liberally, 104; - bishops evade coercion, 105; - king again tries in 1252, 106; - bishops, led by Grosseteste, refuse, 106; - his miserable misrule, 108; - dealings with Simon of Montfort in Gascony, 118–120; - his financial difficulties reach climax, 1257, 120; - continued quarrels with barons, 122; - obtains dispensation from promises to barons, 124; - civil war is declared, 126; - defeated by Simon of Montfort, and peace made, 1264, 127; - war again breaks out, 132; - is victorious, 137 - - Henry VIII., 197, 201, 202, 203, 207, 208 - - Holland, Sir John, 159 - - Holles, 265 - - Horne, Alderman, 182 - - Horne, Alderman, supports Tyler, and welcomes him to London, 156 - - Hotham, Sir John, 267 - - Howe, Lord, 308 - - Hugh of Lincoln, 77 - - Herbert of Bosham (quoted), 38, 58 - - - Iden, Alexander, 189, 190 - - Innocent III., Pope, 77, 81, 83, 95 - - Innocent IV., Pope, 104, 106, 110, 111, 113 - - Ireton, General, 280, 286 - - Islip, Archbishop of Canterbury, 144 - - - John, King, refuses to acknowledge Stephen Langton’s appointment to - archbishopric, 81; - seizes estates of Canterbury, and drives chapter into exile, 82; - is excommunicated, 83; - meets primate at Winchester and is formally absolved, 85; - strife with barons, 86; - his campaign to recover lost Angevine provinces, 87; - capitulation to the barons, 90; - signs the Great Charter, 91; - his death, 95 - - John of Gaunt, calls parliament at Northampton, 147; - his unpopularity with the people, 151; - his palace of the Savoy and its valuable contents destroyed, 157 - - John of Salisbury (quoted), 56 - - Jones, Ernest, 324; - joins Chartist movement at 27, 325; - son of an officer and educated abroad, 325; - works with Feargus O’Connor, 325; - attends Chartist convention, 327; - addresses large meetings in London, 328; - arrested, tried, found guilty of seditious speech and - imprisoned, 328; - on his release Chartist movement declining, 329; - contests Halifax unsuccessfully, 330; - gives support to advanced radicals, 330; - stands twice unsuccessfully for Nottingham, 330; - dies suddenly at the age of 50, 330 - - - Kemp, Cardinal, Archbishop of York, Chancellor to Henry VI., - 187, 188, 190 - - Kent, Earl of, 159 - - Ket, Robert, landowner in Norfolk, a tanner by trade, 223; - sympathies on the side of the people, 223; - offers to lead the movement against enclosures of land, 224; - he is eagerly accepted as captain, and leads large army towards - Norwich, 224; - issues manifesto attacking landlords, 225; - advances to Mousehold, and his force increases to 20,000, 228; - sends statement to Edward VI., 229; - king replies by herald, 229; - sets about organising and victualling his followers, as he is not - content with vague promises, 230; - arrests landowners, 231; - repudiates king’s “pardon” as being a just and innocent man, 232; - his arrest ordered by king’s messenger, but impossible in the - presence of his followers, 232; - friction arises between Norwich authorities and the rebels, 232; - fight ensues, Norwich in his hands, 233; - unsuccessfully opposed by Marquis of Northampton, 234; - commands in Norwich for three weeks, 235; - disappointed at rising not becoming general, 236; - negotiates with Earl of Warwick, sent to suppress revolt, 237; - abrupt conclusion, and battle follows, 238; - his mistaken tactics and defeat, 239; - his followers surrender to Warwick, 239; - his flight and capture, 239; - tried, found guilty of high treason and condemned to death, 241; - hanged in chains in Norwich, 241 - - Ket, William, 223, 239, 240, 241 - - Knolles, Sir Robert, 156 - - Knyvett, Sir Edmund, 236 - - - Langham, Simon, Archbishop of Canterbury, 144 - - Langland, Robert, 145 - - Langton, Stephen, appointed to archbishopric of Canterbury against - King John’s wishes by Innocent III., 81, 82; - is driven into exile by the king, 82; - returns six years later, 85; - starts the movement for the Great Charter, 86; - frames articles for the Charter, 90; - disagreement with papal legate, 94; - works for preservation of peace during early years of Henry - III.’s reign, 95; - his character and place in history, 96 - - Laud, Archbishop, 252, 253, 256, 257, 260, 262, 272 - - Legge, John, 147, 160 - - le Despenser, Hugh, Justiciar, 126, 128, 134 - - Lilburne, John, apprenticed to a cloth merchant in London and becomes - friend of Prynne, 278; - charged before Star Chamber with circulating unlicensed books, and - sentenced to be whipped, pilloried, and imprisoned, 278; - released by order of Long Parliament, 278; - fights at Edgehill and Marston Moor, where he is taken - prisoner, 278; - leaves army in 1645 rather than take the Covenant, 279; - resists the tyranny of parliamentary government, 279; - heads the party in the army called the Levellers, 281; - again imprisoned and released in 1649, 282; - writes pamphlets against the government and is again - imprisoned, 284; - petition presented to parliament for his release, 284; - tried for treasonable writings, 287; - fined and banished, 288; - goes to Holland, and returns, without permission, to London, - in 1653, 289; - arrested and acquitted, 289; - again imprisoned by Cromwell for two years, 290; - converted to Quakerism, 290; - released and pensioned, 290; - dies at Eltham, 290 - - Litster, Geoffrey, follower of John Ball in Norfolk, 143, 146; - his death, 168, 217 - - Looney, 328 - - Lovett, 319, 322 - - Luard (quoted), 101–2 - - Lyons, Richard, 161 - - - Macaulay, Lord (quoted), 264 - - Malpas, Philip, 185 - - Martin, Papal Legate, 110 - - Matthew of Westminster (quoted), 127 - - Maurice, C. E. (quoted), 95 - - Mendall, John, a name by which Jack Cade was known, 175 - - Moleyns, Bishop of Chichester, supporter of Duke of Suffolk, killed at - Portsmouth, 174 - - Montfort, Henry of, eldest son of Earl of Leicester, 133, 134 - - Montfort, Simon of, second son of Earl of Leicester, 132, 133 - - Montfort, Simon of, Earl of Leicester, son of first Earl of Leicester, - marries Eleanor, sister of Henry III., and widow of Earl of - Pembroke, 117; - boyhood passed in France, 117; - leaves for crusades, distinguished career in Palestine, 118; - returns in 1242, 118; - works with Grosseteste in his reforms, 118; - goes to Gascony for five years (1248–53) and deals with turbulent - nobles, 118; - saves Gascony for English crown, and restores order in the - province, 119; - Henry III.’s ingratitude, 119; - recognized leader of the barons on his return to England, 120; - successful in “Mad Parliament,” 1258, 122; - as “foreigner” yields castles of Kenilworth and Odiham, 123; - fresh difficulties with Henry III. in carrying out Provisions of - Oxford, 124; - civil war imminent, 1264; - and many bishops and barons desert Simon, 125; - offers £30,000 to king to make peace and adhere to Provisions of - Oxford--proposal rejected, 126; - Battle of Lewes won by Simon, 126; - peace made, 127; - draws up new scheme of reform, the precursor of later representative - government, 129; - fresh disturbances and defections, followed by renewal of war, 132; - Battle of Evesham, and death of Simon, 134; - interred in Evesham Abbey, 134 - - More, Sir Thomas, born 1478, member of Cardinal Morton’s household, - leaves there for Oxford, and later studies law in Lincoln’s - Inn, 193; - friendship with Erasmus, 194; - spends four years with Carthusians, 195; - leaves Charterhouse, marries and enters parliament, 195; - opposes Henry VII.’s exactions, 195; - Under-Sheriff for the City, 196; - embassies to Flanders and Calais, 197; - enters Henry VIII.’s service, and rises rapidly to highest offices - of State, 197; - happy domestic life, 198; - withholds support from king on his divorce from Catherine of - Aragon, 203; - resigns chancellorship, 205; - declines to be present at Anne Boleyn’s coronation, 206; - unsuccessful attempt to implicate him in the “treason” of Holy Maid - of Kent, 206; - finds himself unable to take oath denying papal supremacy, and is - sent to Tower, 207; - indicted for treason, 208; - sentenced to death, 209; - beheaded on Tower Hill, 210; - beatified, 213 - - Mortimer, name by which Jack Cade was popularly known, 176 - - Mortimer, Roger, 132 - - - Newton, Sir John, Governor of Rochester Castle, taken prisoner - by Tyler, 149; - sent with message from Tyler to the king, 154 - - Nicholas, papal legate, 86 - - Norfolk, Duke of, 202 - - Northampton, Council of, 48 - - Northampton, Marquis of (William Parr), 234 - - - Oastler, 323 - - O’Brien, James Bronterre, 320, 321, 322 - - O’Connor, Feargus, 320, 323, 329, 330 - - Otho, papal legate, 109, 110 - - Overton, Richard, 284 - - - Palgrave, Sir Francis (quoted), 22, 23 - - Pandulf, papal legate, 83, 94 - - Pankhurst, Mrs., 336 - - Pankhurst, Christabel, 336 - - Paris, Matthew (quoted), 100, 105, 108, 113, 117, 124 - - Parker, Matthew, afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury, 231, 232 - - Perkins, Corporal, 286 - - Petibone, John, 232 - - Place, Francis, 314, 319, 320 - - Powell, Professor York (quoted), 30, 65, 91, 121, 135 - - Prince, 284 - - Pym, John, enters House of Commons, 1614, 260; - conspicuous in “Short Parliament,” 260; - supports Eliot in Buckingham’s impeachment, 261; - becomes leader of parliamentary party, 261; - canvasses England on horseback before “Long Parliament,” 261; - opens charge of impeachment against Strafford, 262; - active work in parliament, 263, 264; - makes overtures to the queen, 263; - impeached for high treason, 265; - takes refuge in city from Charles, 266; - secures Portsmouth and Hull for the parliament, 266; - his “solemn league and covenant” accepted by parliament, 269; - dies, 1643, and buried in Westminster Abbey, 269 - - - Rich, Edmund, Archbishop of Canterbury, 106; - retires to Pontigny, 1240, and dies, 109 - - Richard II., agrees to interview with Tyler, 154; - allows himself to be dissuaded, 155; - sends to Tyler for written statement of grievances, 157; - agrees to a meeting at Mile End, 159; - assents to Tyler’s requests, 160; - second meeting at Smithfield, 162; - again agrees to Tyler’s demands, 164; - after Tyler’s death personally disperses his followers, 166; - the danger passed, rebels fiercely punished, 167; - formally annuls charters granted to Tyler, 168; - his death, 170 - - Richard the Breton, 59–63 - - Richard, Earl of Cornwall, half brother to Henry III., became King of - the Romans, 118 - - Richard, Earl of Gloucester, 121, 122, 124 - - Rishanger, Chronicler for St. Albans (quoted), 121, 134 - - Rockingham, Council of, 13, 15 - - Roger of Wendover (quoted), 88 - - Roper, William, son-in-law to Sir Thomas More, 195, 196, 202 - - Roper, Margaret (his wife), 198 - - Russell, Lord John, 321, 326, 329 - - - Sadler, 323 - - Salisbury, Earl of, counsels Richard II. not to interview Tyler, 155; - at Smithfield, 163; - his death, 170 - - Sanders, Henry, 297 - - Say-and-Sele, Lord, treasurer to Henry VI., impeached for - treason, 174; - arrested and taken to Tower, 181; - beheaded by Cade’s order, 184 - - Scales, Lord, guardian of prisoners in Tower, 182; - in conjunction with mayor and corporation opposes Cade, 186 - - Seldon, 252 - - Shaftesbury, Lord, 323 - - Sharpe, 328 - - Sheffield, Lord, 234 - - Sibley, Alderman, 156 - - Somerset, Protector, 221, 236 - - Stafford, Archbishop of Canterbury, Chancellor to Henry VI., - 181, 187, 188 - - Stafford, Sir Humfrey, 180 - - Stafford, Sir William, 180 - - Standish, Ralph, 165, 166 - - Steward, Augustine, 234, 235 - - Strafford, Earl of, 252, 256, 262, 263 - - Straw, Jack, priest in Essex, follower of John Ball, 143; - acts as lieutenant to Wat Tyler, 149; - hanged without trial, 167 - - Strode, 265 - - Sudbury, Simon, Archbishop of Canterbury, 144; - his palace at Canterbury ransacked by Tyler, 152; - Lambeth palace stormed by Tyler and records destroyed, but building - uninjured, 156; - beheaded by Tyler, on Tower Hill, 161 - - Suffolk, Duke of, chief minister to Henry VI., 173; - impeached as a traitor, 174; - beheaded, 174 - - Suffolk, Earl of, President of Richard II.’s council, 155, - 163, 167, 170 - - Sutherton, Leonard, 232 - - - Tonge, Alderman, 156 - - Theobald, Archbishop, 33, 34, 36 - - Thompson, Corporal William, 285 - - Thompson, Cornet, 286 - - Tressilian, Sir Robert, 167, 170 - - Tyler, John, 148, 149 - - Tyler, Wat, chosen captain of peasants at Maidstone, 149; - his recorded history can be followed for eight days only, 150; - his followers at first moderate, 151; - at Canterbury, 152; - bursts open gaol at Maidstone and releases Ball and other - prisoners, 153; - sets out for London at head of 30,000 men, 153; - encamps at Blackheath, 153; - sends Sir John Newton with message to Richard II., 154; - interview refused, 155; - he marches on London Bridge, and destroys adjacent property, 155; - keeps his followers under strict discipline, 156; - demands interview with the king, 158; - conference at Mile End, 159, 160; - invites king to meet him again, at Smithfield, 162; - his demands agreed to, 164; - in sudden scuffle draws dagger, strikes Walworth, and is mortally - wounded in return, 165; - his head exposed on London Bridge, 166 - - - Urban, Pope, 18, 19 - - - Vernon, 328 - - Vincent, 321 - - Von Hutten, Ulrich, 193 - - - Warwick, Earl of, High Chamberlain to Henry VIII., 236–240 - - Walter, Hubert, Bishop of Salisbury, afterwards Archbishop of - Canterbury, 69, 70, 73, 76, 77, 81 - - Walter of Coventry (quoted), 85 - - Walworth, William, Mayor of London, owns London houses of - ill-fame, 155; - the same destroyed by Tyler, 155; - attempts to fortify London Bridge, 155; - urges king and council to action, 157; - at Smithfield, 163; - wounds Tyler mortally, 165; - knighted by Richard, 166 - - Walwyn, 283 - - Warham, Archbishop, 197 - - Watson, a Norwich preacher, 229 - - Waynfleet, William, Bishop of Winchester, 188 - - Wellington, Duke of, 326 - - Wentworth (see Strafford, Earl of). - - Weston, Chancellor of the Exchequer, 252 - - Wilberforce, William, 313 - - William I., his character, 3; - condition of country under, 3–5; - death, 5 - - William II., his character, 5; - condition of England under, 6; - appoints Anselm to Archbishopric of Canterbury, 10; - his quarrel with Anselm, 11–13, _et seq._; - his death, 19 - - Williams, 328 - - Windebank, 262 - - Winstanley, Gerrard, 286; - leader of the “Digger” movement, 293; - born in Lancashire, but settled in London as a trader, 294; - fails, and retires to the country, 294; - publishes pamphlets, social and religious, 295; - first action of the “Diggers,” 297–8; - appeals to General Fairfax against interference, 299; - receives little notice, 300; - makes further active efforts, 300; - movement suppressed, 300; - little known of him later, 301 - - Wollstonecraft, Mary, 336 - - Wolsey, Cardinal, 197, 201, 202, 203, 208, 217, 222 - - Wraw, John, supporter of Ball in Suffolk, 143, 146; - follows Wat Tyler, 149; - at Blackheath, 153; - returns to Suffolk to announce rising, 153; - is hanged as rebel, 167 - - -_The Westminster Press (Gerrards Ltd.), Harrow Road, London, W._ - - - - -Transcriber’s note: - -Punctuation, hyphenation, and spelling were made consistent when a -predominant preference was found in the original book; otherwise they -were not changed. - -Simple typographical errors were corrected; unpaired quotation -marks were remedied when the change was obvious, and otherwise left -unpaired. - -Illustrations in this eBook have been positioned between paragraphs -and outside quotations. In versions of this eBook that support -hyperlinks, the page references in the List of Illustrations lead to -the corresponding illustrations. - -Footnotes, originally at the bottoms of pages, have been collected and -placed just before the Index of this eBook. - -The index was not checked for proper alphabetization or correct page -references. - - - -***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LEADERS OF THE PEOPLE*** - - -******* This file should be named 64437-0.txt or 64437-0.zip ******* - - -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: -http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/6/4/4/3/64437 - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - |