then transacting, especially concerning the reformation of religion." Strype further adds :-"I find the Archbishop's name very frequently at the Council Board."* The official records of the Council fully bear out Strype. According to the Council Book, the Archbishop attended that assembly with the greatest punctuality," and, "acting as regent, nothing could be done without his presence." Mr. Froude having unconsciously used Strype, writes: "No plunder of Church or Crown had touched the hands of Thomas Cranmer. No fibre of political intrigue, or crime, or conspiracy could be traced to the Palace at Lambeth. He had lent himself, it is true, in his too great eagerness to carry out the Reformation, to the persecution of Bishops Bonner and Gardyner." This challenge as to Cranmer's unselfishness can at once be answered. Mr. Froude admits that in Henry's reign Cranmer manifested no active opposition to Thomas Crumwell in his measures for the confiscation of monastic property. What part did the Archbishop take in the disposal of the luckless Lord Hussey's domains and manors? Like the Seymours and Dudleys he was surrounded by needy relatives and followers, in whose interest he was, so far, disinterested-facilely profuse in providing for them from the property of others. Did Mr. Froude not know that in the Archbishop's dealings with the diocese of Canterbury he was several times guilty of simony and other actions by no means disinterested? He compelled Archdeacon Warham to resign his office for a certain sum of money, in order to confer it on his own brother, Edward Cranmer-" a man of mean capacity and bad reputation." He further alienated a *Strype's Memorials of Cranmer, vol. i. p. 474. number of manors of the see to the King, indemnifying private emolument some of the On this transaction Dean Hook re himself by seizing for his confiscated abbey lands.* says: "It will be difficult to justify Cranmer's proceeding with respect to the promotion of his brother Edward." Even Strype leniently admits that Cranmer was warded by Somerset with a grant of Church lands for his own benefit, and which was to be considered as a compensation for the delicate part he had taken in violating King Henry's will."+ But what amount of Church property did Cranmer receive in King Henry's reign? Were not the lands attached to Bilsington and Bradsole conferred on him by the King? Was he not--worse than all-likewise the recipient of the plunder of hospitals? The King, for instance, presented him with the revenues of the hospital of St. Gregory, founded by the illustrious Lanfranc, the annual rental of which was £166 4s.-a handsome sum in those days. Contemporary records avouch the institution to have been of extensive benefit to the sick and needy.§ Henry dismantled it, and abstracted its means, in order to "enable the Cranmer family to appear more respectable." I admit that Cranmer did not, from all the property of the poor which he acquired, appropriate the proceeds to himself and family exclusively. He made the following apportionments to his "other relatives" and "servants "The priory of Shelford to * Records of the Monastic Confiscations. † See Strype's Memorials of Cranmer. Dr. Whyte on the Fate of the English Hospitals (black letter). § "The first Protestant subject," writes Miss Strickland, "who endowed an hospital in England was Lambarde, a learned antiquarian lawyer, author of the Tower Records. In 1601, he founded an hospital, or asylum, at East Greenwich, where twenty poor people were clothed and fed." his brother-in-law, Harold Rosell, clerk of his kitchen; the Grey Friars, in Canterbury, to Thomas Cobham, a cousin ; the Priory of Pontefract, to John Wakefield, controller of the household; Croxden, or Roncester, to his servant, Francis Basset; and Newstead to another domestic named Markham.* The "offerings " do not end here. Cranmer's "keeping aloof from the members of Edward's Government," and "working at the Prayer Book," are not borne out by any evidence I have yet seen. Where Mr. Froude obtained his facts outside his fancy I cannot imagine. Had Cranmer no share in the councils of Dudley, Paget, Northampton and Dorset? Tytler, in his "Life of Edward and Mary," and the papers to be found in the Record Office, also differ utterly from the statements put forward respecting Cranmer's abstention from political affairs at this epoch. In fact, he was an active politician. Ralph Morrice, to whom I have before referred, was long in the service of Dr. Cranmer. He was, as might be supposed, devoted to the Reformation.. Ralph Morrice wrote a Life of Dr. Cranmer, which is still amongst the MSS. at the University of Cambridge. In John Strype's Memorials of Archbishop Cranmer he made extensive use of this valuable history. In his capacity of a secret correspondent to John Foxe Morrice aided the latter in his "muddled narratives." How far Morrice may be censured for the part he took in Foxe's work it might be difficult to ascertain. He, however, confirms the statements of many of his contemporaries as to the benevolent character of Cranmer. Yet he admits that * Jenkyn's Cranmer, vol. i. p. 161; J. H. Blunt's Reformation of the Church of England, p. 278. the Archbishop was extremely cold, almost repulsive in manner to the people whom he sometimes styled "lazy creatures." Be this as it may, the people hated Cranmer on account of the injustice with which he acted towards four of the King's wives. * Morrice was the personal friend of Roger Ascham, whom he described as "an admirable story-teller; a good judge of old pictures, books, and wine." Roger Ascham was known as the convivial companion of both Reformers and Catholics. In Queen Mary's reign Morrice was imprisoned, but escaped from his dungeon. Upon the accession of Elizabeth he was welcomed back by the English Reformers; and Archbishop Parker became his patron and friend. He had no desire to enter upon a crusade of religious persecution; and retired from the scene. In 1565 he was living in easy circumstances" at Bakesham, where he entertained Mrs. Whitechurch, once known as Mrs. Cranmer. Ralph Morrice was " a harmless and rather kindly sort of man." He was well acquainted with much of the secret movements of his master in relation to Crumwell and the King, but from a sense of honour and a delicacy of feeling, little considered in those days, he was silent in relation to the history of the Past, and performed the part of the faithful steward to a liberal master. * Strype's Memorials of Archbishop Cranmer, vol. i. CHAPTER XXII. DEATH OF EDWARD VI. Ar nine of the clock on the night of the 7th of July, 1553, the Boy-King expired. The doctors who opened the body reported that his "blessed Highness had been poisoned, but by whom no one could ascertain."* Subsequent inquiry, however, proved that no poison had been administered. Perhaps the story concerning the King having been poisoned had its origin in the fact that the noted Robert Dudley was appointed as "a gentleman in waiting" to the monarch a few days before his death. Northumberland was too cunning a politician not to see that the continuance of the King's life till he was of age would enable him to carry out his daring schemes of ambition with greater success. Robert Dudley, therefore, studied the interests of his family, which were decidedly in favour of prolonging the life of the Sovereign. The cause of young Edward's death was doubtless pulmonary consumption. Archbishop Cranmer officiated at the King's funeral, in Westminster Abbey. The service was performed in English, which gave much offence to the Princess Mary, who considered Cranmer "as the deviser of every insult offered to her." Upon the accession of Mary, she commanded the * Medical Report to the Council; Strype's Memorials. |