1553. seas; followed not long after by Bishop Poinet of Winchester. AN. REG.1, But Barlow made not so much haste as not to be committed to the Fleet by the Lords of the Council, from whence, upon some satisfaction given to the Lord Chancellor Gardiner by his discreet and moderate answers, he was not long after set at liberty, and so crossed the seas-resolved to trust himself no more to a second hazard, having with so much difficulty escaped the first1. How it succeeded with the rest, we shall see hereafter. Upon which smiting of the shepherds, it is not to be wondered at if their flocks were scattered. ment of 13. Now as concerning the Archbishop, the substance of Imprisonhis story is briefly this. He had been a chief instrument in Cranmer. King Henry's time of setting forward the divorce; and in King Edward's, of advancing the Reformation. The Queen conceived hereupon such a high displeasure (it had been malice in another) against the man, that nothing but his death could appease the same2. His death is therefore fully resolved upon by Gardiner, Bonner, and the rest of the popish Prelates. Of which the first had prosecuted the divorce as far as any; and the second was as forward as the best in the Reformation, as long as Cromwell lived to prefer and countenance him. But their standings out and sufferings for it in King Edward's time were thought sufficient expiations for their former errors, when the good offices which Cranmer had done for her in her father's times were worn out of memory. Die then he must; but by what law he was to die, proved a knot more difficult than could be speedily untied. It was advised to charge him with high treason, as being privy to the plot of the Duke of Northumberland for excluding the Queen from the succession. But against this it was objected that he was the last of the council who subscribed unto it; and that the council would be wary of making that a capital offence in him, of which they were all equally guilty. In the next place it was propounded to pro Hereford."-Burnet, II. 553. Comp. Wharton in Strype's Cranmer, ii. 682, ed. Eccl. Hist. Soc. 1 Burnet states, II. 553, that a violent book against the Reformation was published at this time in Barlow's name; but he questions its genuineness. Comp. Collier, vi. 68. Barlow's recantation is given by Strype, Eccl. Mem. iii. 153. 1553. AN. REG. 1, ceed against him in case of heresy, that being the most likely way to content the Pope, whose favour was to be procured by all means imaginable. But the worst was, that the statutes made in the time of King Richard the Second and King Henry the Fourth, for putting heretics to death, had been abrogated in the time of King Henry the Eighth1; as that of the Six Articles, more terrible than either of the other two, had been repealed by the late King Edward the Sixth. No better course, therefore, than to find some occasion for laying him up in some safe prison; and when they had him there, to proceed against him as time and opportunity should administer some fit matter for it. 14. About this time a bruit was raised that Cranmer, to ingratiate himself with the Queen, had promised to celebrate the exequies of the deceased King according to the Romish manner2. To clear himself of which reproach he drew up a manifest3, declaring in the same that he was ready to maintain the Articles of Religion set forth by his procurement in the time of King Edward, to be consonant to the word of God, the doctrine of the Apostles, and the practice of the best and purest times. These papers, lying in the window in his private chamber, were seen and liked by Bishop Scory, by whom they were transcribed and communicated to many others. Coming at last unto the knowledge of the council, the Archbishop is commanded to appear before them, interrogated about the papers, and prompted by Bishop Heath, who was then amongst 26 them, to let them know whether he were not sorry for it. To 196 which the Archbishop made reply, that, as he did not deny himself to be the author of those papers, so he must needs confess 1 This is a mistake; for the act 25 Hen. VIII. c. 14, while it repealed that of Hen. IV., confirmed those of Rich. II. and Hen. V., and enacted the punishment of death. It was the act of 1 Edw. VI. c. 12, which abrogated all these—as is rightly stated above, i. 97. 2 It was also said that the restoration of the mass at Canterbury was by the Archbishop's authority. 3 Printed by Fox, vi. 539; Burnet, II. ii. 349. 4 Fox, viii. 39. Terentianus, in the letter mentioned, p. 102, n. 2, states that the Archbishop actually executed his intention of posting his declaration about London.-Orig. Letters, Park. Soc. 371; Epp. Tigur. 245. Comp. Jenkyns, Pref. to Cranm. cxii. The same statement is made by Sleidan, b. xxi. p. 475. Lat. 590. Eng. 1553. himself to be sorry that they went from him in such sort as they AN. REG. 1, did. “For I had purposed,” saith he, "to set out the manifest in a more large and ample manner; and to have it set upon St Paul's door, and the doors of all the churches in London, with my own seal affixed unto it." Upon which stout and honest answer, they thought fit to dismiss him for the present: it being conceived by some of the more moderate spirits, that it would be punishment enough to deprive him only of his bishoprick, and to assign him a sufficient maintenance upon the exhibiting of a true inventory of his whole estate, with a commandment to keep his house without meddling in matters of religion. But those who better understood the mind of the Queen so ordered it, that on the 14th of September he was sent to the Tower, where he remained prisoner till the 3rd of November. At what time he was arraigned in the Guild-hall of London, together with the Lord Guilford Dudley, the late Queen Jane his wife, and others; all of them being attainted and condemned of treason, as before was said2. And he lay under this attaindure till the year next following, when the old statutes for putting heretics to death were revived in parliament. Which having furnished his adversaries with a better ground to proceed upon, to the contentment of the Pope and the Queen together, they waived the prosecuting of that attaindure to an execution, and wholly fixed themselves on the point of heresy. At the hearing whereof he was right well pleased, because the case was not now his own, but Christ's; not the Queen's, but the Church's 3. foreign 15. The severity of this beginning against the natives Expulsion of gave a sufficient warning to all such strangers who had took Protestants sanctuary here in the time of King Edward, to provide betimes for their departure. Amongst whom none more openly aimed at than Peter Martyr, because none of them had given wider wounds than he to the catholic cause. Tresham, a senior Canon of Christ-Church, had held some points against him at his first coming thither; and now he took the benefit of the times, in causing both that house and many others in the University to put some public scorn upon him. Not finding any safety there, he retires to Lambeth, where he was sure of as much safety as that place could give him. A consultation had been held by 3 Fox, vi. 413. 1 Fox, viii. 39. 2 Sup. 37. AN. REG. 1, some of the more fiery spirits for his commitment unto prison1. 1553. But he came hither (as it was well known) on the public faith, 2 A curious account of P. Martyr's escape is given by Julius Teren- 3 Sanders, 247. 4 Fuller, iv. 155; Fox, vi. 429. 5 Fox, vi. 394. 6 A proclamation "for driving out of the realm strangers and foreigners," is given by Fox, vi. 429; Wilkins, iv. 93. 1553. time many of the English departed also, as well students as AN. REG. 1, others, to the number of 300 or thereabouts; hoping to find that freedom and protection in a foreign country which was denied them in their own. The principal of those which put themselves into this voluntary exile were, Katherine, the last wife of Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk1, Robert Bertye, Esquire, husband to the Duchess, the Bishops of Winchester and Wells2, Sir Richard Morrison, Sir Anthony Cook, and Sir John Cheek3, Dr Cox, Dr Sandys and Dr Grindall, and divers others of whom we shall hear more hereafter on another occasion1. ed Legate for 16. Of all these things they neither were nor could be Pole appointignorant in the court of Rome, to which the death of King England. Edward had been swiftly posted on the wings of fame. The news of the succession of Queen Mary stayed not long behind -so much more welcome to Pope Julius the Third, who then held that see, because it gave him some assurance of his readmission into the power and jurisdiction of his predecessors in the realm of England. For what less was to be expected, considering that she was brought up in the catholic religion, interessed in the respects of her mother, and cousin in the first degree unto Charles the Emperor? In the pursuance of which hopes it was resolved that Cardinal Pole should be sent Legate into England, who, being of the royal blood, a man of eminent learning and exemplary life, was looked on as the fittest instrument to reduce that kingdom. The Cardinal, well knowing that he stood attainted by the laws of the land, and that the name of Henry was still preserved in estimation amongst the people, thought it not safe to venture thither before he fully understood the state of things. He therefore secretly dispatcheth Commendonius, a right trusty minister, by whom 1 A narrative of the Duchess' escape is given by Fox, viii. 569, seqq. 2 Poinet and Barlow. 3 Cheke was arrested in Flanders, and brought back to England. He recanted, and soon after died, it is said, of grief and shame which followed from his lapse.-Fox, viii. 257; Fuller, iv. 232-3. 4 Fuller, iv. 228-37. 5 Sarpi, 384. The Bull of his appointment, dated Aug. 5, 1553, is in Wilkins, iv. 87. 6 Sarpi, 384; Sanders, 250-who, however, commits the mistake of representing Commendone as sent by the Pope, whereas he was really |