John of Jerusalem, and Robert Grànceter, merchant, for going to several foreign princes, and persuading them to make war upon the king, and assist the lords Darcy and Hussey in the rebellion they had raised. Two gentlemen, a Dominican friar, and a yeoman, were by the same act attainted, for saying, that that venomous serpent the bishop of Rome was supreme head of the church of England; another gentleman, two priests, and a yeoman, are attainted for treason in general, no particular crime being specified. Thus sixteen persons were in this manner attainted, and if there was any examination of witnesses for convicting them, it was either in the star-chamber, or before the privy-council; for there is no mention of any evidence that was brought in the journals. There was also much haste made in the passing this bill; it being brought in the 10th of May, was read that day for the first and second time, and the 11th of May for the third time. The commons kept it five days before they sent it back, and added some more to those that were in the bill at first; but how many were named in the bill originally, and how many were afterwards added, cannot be known. Fortescue and Dingley suffered the 10th of July. As for the countess of Sarum, the lord Herbert saw in a record, that bulls from the pope were found in her house, "that she kept correspondence with her son, and that she forbade her tenants to have the New Testament in English, or any other of the books that had been published by the king's authority." She was then about seventy years of age, but showed by the answers she made that she had a vigorous and masculine mind. She was kept two years prisoner in the Tower after the act had passed, the king by that reprieve designing to oblige her son to a better behaviour; but upon a fresh provocation, by a new rebellion in the north, sho was behended, and in her the name and line of Plantagenet determined. The marchioness of Exeter died a natural death. In November this year, were the abbots of Reading, Glastonbury, and Colchester, attainted of treason, of which mention was made formerly.

In the parliament that sat in the year 1540 they went on to follow that strange precedent which they had made the former year. By the 56th act Giles Heron was attainted of treason, no special matter being mentioned.

By the 57th act, Richard Fetherstoun, Thomas Abell, and Edward Powel, priests, and William Horn, a yeoman, were attainted for denying the king's supremacy, and adhering to the bishop of Rome: by the same act the wife of one Tirrell, Esq., was attainted for refusing her duty of allegiance, and denying Prince Edward to be prince and heir of the crown; and one Laurence Cook of Doncaster was also attainted for contriving the king's death.

By the 58th act, Gregory Buttolph, Adam Damplip, and Edward Brindeholm, clerks, and Clement Philpot, gentleman, were attainted for adhering to the bishop of Rome, for corresponding with cardinal Pole, and endeavouring to surprise the town of Calais. By the same act, Barnes, Gerard, and Jerome were attainted, of whose sufferings an account has been already given.

By the 59th act, William Bird, a priest, and chaplain to the lord Hungerford, was attainted for having said to one that was going to assist the king against the rebels in the north -"I am sorry thou goest; seest thou not how the king plucketh down images and abbeys every day? and if the king go thither himself, he will never come home again, nor any of them all which go with him; and in truth it were pity he should ever come home again:" and at another time, upon one's saying, "O good Lord, I ween all the world will be heretics in a little time;" Bird said, "Doest thou marvel at that? I tell thee it is no marvel, for the great Master of all is an heretic, and such a one as there is not his like in the world.

By the same act the lord Hungerford was likewise attainted. The crimes specified are, "that he, knowing Bird to be a traitor, did entertain him in his house as his chaplain; that he ordered another of his chaplains, sir Hugh Wood, and one doctor Maudlin, to use conjuring that they might know how long the king should live, and whether he should be victorious over his enemies or not; and that these three years last past he had frequently committed the detestable sin of sodomy with several of his servants." All these were attainted by that parliament. The lord Hungerford was executed the same day with Cromwell; he died in such disorder that some thought he was frantic, for he called often to the executioner to despatch him, and said he was weary of life and longed to be dead, which seemed strange in a man

that had so little cause to hope in his death. For Powel, Fetherstoun, and Abell, they suffered the same day with Barnes and his friends, as hath been already shown.

This year Sampson, bishop of Chichester, and one doctor Wilson, were put in the Tower upon suspicion of correspondence with the pope; but upon their submission they had their pardon and liberty. In the year 1541, five priests and ten secular persons, some of them being gentlemen of quality, were raising a new rebellion in Yorkshire; which was suppressed in time, and the promoters of it, being apprehended, were attainted and executed; and this occasioned the death of the countess of Sarum, after the execution of the sentence had been delayed almost two years.

The last instance of the king's severity was in the year 1543, in which one Gardiner, that was the bishop of Winchester's kinsman and secretary, and three other priests, were tried for denying the king's supremacy, and soon after executed*. But what special matter was laid to their charge cannot be known, for the record of their attainder is lost.

The Conclusion.

:

These were the proceedings of this king against those that adhered to the interests of Rome in which, though there is great ground for just censure, for as the laws were rigorous, so the execution of them was raised to the highest that the law could admit; yet there is nothing in them to justify all the clamours which that party have raised against king Henry, and by which they pursue his memory to this day; and are far short, both in number and degrees, of the cruelties of queen Mary's reign, which yet they endeavour all that is possible to extenuate or deny.

To conclude, we have now gone through the reign of king Henry VIII., who is rather to be reckoned among the great than the good princes. He exercised so much severity on men of both persuasions, that the writers of both sides have laid open his faults and taxed his cruelty. But as neither of them were much obliged to him, so none have taken so much care to set forth his good qualities as his enemies have done to enlarge on his vices. I do not deny that he is to be numbered among the ill princes, yet I cannot rank him with the worst.

* Gardiner was executed, the other three were pardoned, are said to have been Master More, Master Heyhode, and according to an account I have seen, MS. Their names Master Roper.-ANON. CORRECT.

THE END OF THE THIRD BOOK, AND OF THE FIRST PART.

ADDENDA.

After some of the sheets of this history were wrought off, I met with manuscripts of great authority, out of which I have collected several particulars that give a clear light to the proceedings in those times, which since they came too late to my knowledge to be put in their proper places, I shall here add them with references to the places to which they belong.

Ad Page 150, line 10.

THERE it is said, that the earl of Wiltshire, father to queen Anne Boleyn, was one of the peers that judged her.

In this I too implicitly followed doctor Heylin, he seeming to write with more than ordinary care for the vindication of that queen, and with such assurance, as if he had seen the records concerning her, so that I took this upon trust from him. The reason of it was, that in the search I made of attainders, I did not find the record of her trial; so I concluded, that either it was destroyed by order during her daughter's reign, or was accidentally lost since that time: and thus having no record to direct me, I too easily followed the printed books in that particular. But after that part of this history was wrought off, I by chance met with it in another place where it was mislaid; and there I discovered the error I had committed. The earl of Wiltshire was not one of her judges; those by whom she was tried were the duke of Suffolk, the marquis of Exeter, the earls of Arundel, Oxford, Northumberland, Westmoreland, Derby, Worcester, Rutland, Sussex, and Huntington, and the lords Audley, Delaware, Mountague, Morley, Dacres, Cobham, Maltravers, Powis, Mounteagle, Clinton, Sands, Windsor, Wentworth, Burgh, and Mordaunt: in all twenty-six, and not twenty-eight as 1 reckoned them upon a vulgar error. The record mentions one particular concerning the earl of Northumberland, that he was taken with a sudden fit of sickness, and was forced to leave the court before the lord Rochford was tried. This might have been only casual but since he was once in love with the queen, and had designed to marry her (see page 34), it is no wonder if so sad a change in her condition did raise an unusual disorder in him.

When I had discovered the mistake I had made, as I resolved to publish this free confession of it; so I set myself not without some indignation to examine upon what authority doctor Heylin had led me into it. I could find no author that went before him in it, but Sanders; the chief design of whose writing was to defame queen Elizabeth, and to blast her title to the crown. To that end it was no ill piece of his skill, to persuade the world of her mother's lewdness, to say, that her own father was convinced of it, and condemned her for it. And doctor Heylin took this, as he has done many other things, too easily upon Sanders's testimony.

Ad Page 161, line 3.

The articles of religion of which an abstract is there set down, are indeed published by Fuller but he saw not the original, with all the subscriptions to it; which I have had in my hands, and therefore I have put it in the collection with three other papers, which were soon after offered to the king by Cranmer.

Collect. Addenda, Numb. 1.

Collect. Addenda, Numb. 2.

The one is in the form of fifteen queries, concerning some abuses by which the people had been deceived; as namely, by these doctrines, that without contrition sinners may be reconciled to God; that it is in the power of the priest to pardon or not to pardon sin at his pleasure; and that God's pardon cannot be obtained without priestly absolution. Also he complained that the people trusted to outward ceremonies; and their curates for their own gain encouraged them in it. It was observed that the opinion of clergymen's being exempted from the secular judge was ill grounded; that bishops did ordain without due care and trial: that the dignified clergy misapplied their revenues, did not follow their first institution, and did not reside upon their benefices. And in fine he moves that the four sacraments, which had been left undetermined by the Collect. former articles, might be examined: the outward signs and actions, the promises Addenda, made upon them, and the efficacy that was in them, being well considered. Numb. 3.

The second paper consists of two resolutions, made concerning confirmation by the archbishop of Canterbury, and Stokesley, bishop of London, there are several other papers concerning confirmation, but these are only subscribed: and the rest do generally follow these two prelates, who were then the heads of two different parties. The archbishop went on this ground, that all things were to be tried by the Scripture; but Stokesley and almost the whole clergy were for receiving the tradition of the church, as not much inferior to the Scriptures, which he asserts in his subscription.

The third paper was offered to the king by Cranmer, to persuade him to proceed to a Collect. further reformation: that things might be long and well considered before they Addenda, were determined, that nothing might be declared a part of God's faith, without Nunuს. 4. good proofs from scripture: the departing from which rule had been the occasion of all the errors that had been in the church: that now men would not be led as they had been, but would examine matters that many things were now acknowledged to be truths, such as the unlawfulness of the pope's usurped power, for which many had formerly suffered death. Whereupon he desires that some points might be examined by scripture as, whether there is a purgatory, whether departed souls ought to be invocated, whether tradition ought to be believed; whether there be any satisfaction besides the satisfaction of Christ, whether freewill may dispose itself to grace, and whether images ought to be kissed, or used to any other end but as representations of a piece of history? In all these he desired the king would suspend his judgment: and in particular, that he would not determine against the lawfulness of the marriage of the clergy, but would for some time silence both parties. IIe also proposed that this point might, by order from the king, be examined in the universities before indifferent judges: that all the arguments against it might be given to the defenders twelve days before the public disputation; and he offered, that if those who should defend the lawfulness of priests' marriage, were in the opinion of indifferent judges overcome, they should willingly suffer death for it; but if otherwise, all they desired was, that in that point the king might leave them in the liberty to which the word of God left them.

Ad Page 183, line 23.

I have seen a much fuller paper concerning orders and ecclesiastical functions (which the reader will find in the collection) signed by Cromwell, the two archbishops Collect. Addenda, and eleven bishops, and twenty divines and canonists, declaring that the power Numb. 5. of the keys and other church functions is formally distinct from the power of the sword. That this power is not absolute, but to be limited by the rules that are in the scripture, and is ordained only for the edification and good of the church; that this power ought to be still preserved, since it was given by Christ as the means of reconciling sinners to God. Orders were also declared a sacrament, since they consisted of an outward action instituted by Christ, and an inward grace conferred with them; but that all inferior orders, janitors, lectors, &c., were brought into the church to beautify and adorn it, and were taken from the temple of the Jews. And that in the New Testament there is no mention made but of deacons or ministers, and priests or bishops; nor is there belonging to orders any other ceremony mentioned in the Scripture, but prayer and imposition of hands.

This was signed either in the year 1537 or 1538, since it is subscribed both by John Hilsey, bishop of Rochester, and Edward Fox, bishop of Hereford; for the one was consecrated in 1537, and the other died in May, 1538.

On this paper I will add two remarks: the one is, that after this I do never find the inferior degrees under a deacon mentioned in this church; so it seems at this time they were laid aside. They were first set up in the church about the end of the second or the beginning of the third century, in the middle of which we find both Cornelius, bishop of Rome, and St. Cyprian, mentioning them as orders that were then established; and it seems they were designed as previous steps to the sacred functions, that none might be ordained to these but such as had been long before separated from a secular state of life, and had given good proofs of themselves in these lower degrees. But it turned in the church of Rome to be only a matter of form; and many took the first tonsure, that they might be exempted from the secular power, and be qualified for commendams, and some other worldly advantages to which these lower orders were sufficient, by those rules which the canonists had brought in.

'

Another thing is, that both in this writing and in the " Necessary Erudition of a Christian Man," bishops and priests are spoken of as one and the same office. In the ancient church they knew none of those subtleties which were found out in the latter ages. It was then thought enough that a bishop was to be dedicated to his function by a new imposition of hands, and that several offices could not be performed without bishops, such as ordination, confirmation, &c.; but they did not refine in these matters, so much as to inquire whether bishops and priests differed in order and office, or only in degree. But after the schoolmen fell to examine matters of divinity with logical and unintelligible niceties, and the canonists began to comment upon the rules of the ancient church, they studied to make bishops and priests seem very near one another, so that the difference was but small: * they did it with different designs. The schoolmen having set up the grand mystery of transubstantiation, were to exalt the priestly office as much as was possible; for the turning the host into God was so great an action, that they reckoned there could be no office higher than that which qualified a man to so mighty a performance; therefore, as they changed the form of ordination from what it was anciently believed to consist in, to a delivering of the sacred vessels, and held that a priest had his orders by that rite, and not by the imposition of hands; so they raised their order or office so high as to make it equal with the order of a bishop; but as they designed to extol the order of priesthood, so the canonists had as great a mind to depress the episcopal order. They generally wrote for preferment, and the way to it was to exalt the papacy. Nothing could do that so effectually as to bring down the power of bishops. This only could justify the exemptions of the monks and friars, the pope setting up legantine courts, and receiving at first appeals, and then original causes before them, together with many other encroachments on their jurisdiction; all which were unlawful, if the bishops had by divine right jurisdiction in their dioceses; therefore, it was necessary to lay them as low as could be, and to make them think that the power they held was rather as delegates of the apostolic see, than by a commission from Christ or his apostles: so that they looked on the declaring episcopal authority to be of divine right, as a blow that would be fatal to the court of Rome; and, therefore, they did after this at Trent use all possible endeavours to hinder any such decision. It having been then the common style of that age to reckon bishops and priests as the same office, it is no wonder if at this time the clergy of this church, the greatest part of them being still leavened with the old superstition, and the rest of them not having enough of spare time to examine lesser matters, retained still the former phrases in this particular.

On this I have insisted the more, that it may appear how little they have considered things, who are so far carried with their zeal against the established government of this church, as to make much use of some passages of the schoolmen and canonists that deny them

Though most of the schoolmen asserted bishops and priests to be of the same order, for the reason here specified, their being equally appointed to the consecration of the eucharist, which they thought to bo the highest and most perfect function; yet they allowed the bishops a supe

riority of jurisdiction, which some of them were content to call a superior order; as the canonists did also generally, notwithstanding their endeavours to depress the episcopal authority for the advancement of the papal.-GRANGER'S CORRECT.