by the Queen to be restored in Canterbury Cathedral, he expressed his indignation in no measured terms, and sturdily denounced the olden faith. On the other hand it was reported that the Archbishop "offered to celebrate Mass before the Queen." Cranmer, on becoming aware of this statement, quickly hastened to deny its truth, and in doing so spoke with scant courtesy of his Sovereign. He stated that the "Mass was the device and invention of the Father of Lies, who was even then persecuting Christ, His Holy Word, and His Church; that it was not he (Cranmer), but a false, flattering friar and deceitful monk (Dr. Hornden), who had restored the olden worship to Canterbury; that he had never offered to celebrate Mass before the Queen, but was willing, with her permission, to show that it contained many errors; and with the aid of Peter Martyr, to prove that the doctrine and worship established under Edward VI. was the same which had been believed and practised in the first ages of the Church."* Cranmer had numerous copies of this letter circulated, and it caused immense excitement amongst the people, who detested the Archbishop. He was immediately summoned before the Queen's Council, several of whom belonged to the late Government. Here he presented" a bold and uncompromising appearance before his former friends." After two days' discussion he was committed to the Tower on the charge " of high treason and divers other great crimes." In the Tower he remained three years, but under little or no restraint-in fact he might have escaped to Germany if he wished to do so. This was just what Gardyner desired. It is stated that Cranmer's enemies

* This declaration of Cranmer is printed at full length in Strype's Cranmer, vol. i. pp. 437-8.

were numerous and actively engaged in seeking revenge. Again I must repeat that the ill-feeling against Cranmer was chiefly of his own creation. His conduct in the case of Katharine of Arragon, Anna Boleyn, Catharine Howard, and Aune of Cleves, earned for him the fervid detestation of every mother in England. In the reign of Edward he persecuted the Baptists and other sects; but the consignment of Anne Boucher to the flames, overriding the merciful leanings of his young Sovereign, was set down justly as an act of his own cruel will. This last proceeding of a domineering and unscrupulous Churchman utterly wrecked his popularity with all religionists, and every class throughout England. Archbishop Laud was never more execrated by the Puritans of 1641 than Cranmer had been by the Dissenters of his time.

It is probable that the only friend Cranmer possessed at this period was Dr. Gardyner, whom he had treated with such injustice and cruelty in Edward's reign. This may appear strange, but it is nevertheless true. The death of Dr. Gardyner in 1555 had a fatal effect upon Cranmer's existence. With the failure of the unjust and abortive effort to effect a change of dynasty, the Reformers abandoned the Archbishop to his fate; in fact, he seems to have secured no friends, much less constituted a party.*

*The third volume of this work will open with the "Last Days of Archbishop Cranmer."

CHAPTER XXVII.

MARY AND ELIZABETH.

WITH the death of Edward commenced the political career of Elizabeth. Surrounded by perils and troubles, she was noted, even at an early age, for a duplicity to which she must have felt the necessities of her position impelled her. In the words of a French historian, "she was an admirable actress, but without one touch of Nature's kindness or nobility.' That she was deceived, and used by many of her own party was certain; that she was implicated with Wyatt, Courtenay, and other traitors, there is also evidence, direct and indirect, sufficient then to prove treason against her, and for a tenth part of which directed against herself she would have sent the offender to the block. One of Elizabeth's notable biographers makes the admission that "her sister had every reason to doubt her loyalty."* The Government of Mary intercepted two notes addressed to Elizabeth by Sir Thomas Wyatt. In the first of these documents he tells her to remove at once to Donnington, which was in the vicinity of his head-quarters; in the next

* Miss Strickland's Queens of England, vol. v.

Three despatches of

In

note he again "urges her to action." Noailles to the French Government had been intercepted and deciphered, which revealed the plans of the conspirators. Noailles had married one of Elizabeth's maids of honour; which circumstance, of course, afforded a facility for more secure intercourse than otherwise could have publicly taken place between the disaffected heiress of the Crown and the representative of a Foreign Power. addition to these presumptive evidences, a letter supposed to have been written by Elizabeth to the King of France, had fallen into the hands of Queen Mary. The Duke of Suffolk, doubtless with a view to the preservation of his own daughter, Lady Jane Dudley, declared that the object of the conspiracy was the dethronement of the Queen, and the elevation of Elizabeth to her place. Wyatt acknowledged that he had written more than one letter to Elizabeth, and charged Courtenay, face to face, with having first suggested the rebellion. Sir James Crofts confessed

"that he had conferred with Elizabeth, and solicited her to retire to Donnington;" Lord Russell, "that he had privately conveyed letters to her from Wyatt ;" and another prisoner, "that he had been privy to a correspondence between Carew and Courtenay respecting the intended marriage of this nobleman and the princess." "In short," says Miss Strickland," a more disgusting series of treachery and cowardice never was exhibited than on this occasion; and if it be true that there is honesty among dishonestthat is to say, an observance of good faith towards each other in time of peril-it is certain nothing of the kind was to be found among these confederates, who respectively endeavoured, by the denunciation of their associates to shift

the penalty of their mutual offences to their fellows in misfortune.*

Wyatt's first confession was "that the Sieur D'Oysell, when he passed through England into Scotland with the French Ambassador to that country, spoke to Sir James Crofts to persuade him to prevent the marriage of Queen Mary with the heir of Spain; to raise Elizabeth to the throne, marry her to Courtenay, and put the Queen to death."

He also confessed that aid was guaranteed by the King of France to the confederates, and that invasions were projected from France and Scotland.† "We have this morning," writes Mr. Secretary Bourne to the Council, "travailed with Sir Thomas Wyatt, touching the Lady Elizabeth and her servant, Sir William Saintlow; and your lordship shall understand that Wyatt affirmeth his former sayings" (a sworn statement he had made), and says further "that Sir James Crofts knoweth more, if he be sent for and examined. Whereupon Crofts has been called before us and examined, and confesseth with Wyatt, charging Saintlow with like matter, and further, as we shall declare unto your said lordships. Wherefore, under your correction, we think necessary, and beseech you to send for Mr. Saintlow, and to examine him, or cause him to be sent hither, by us to be examined. Crofts is plain, and will tell all.”

The Spanish Ambassador, in his report to the Emperor Charles, dated March 1st, affirms that Crofts had confessed the truth in a written deposition, and admitted in plain terms the intrigues of the French Ambassador with the

Queens of England, vol. v. (first edit.)

† Burnet, Foxe, Griffet; Kempe's Loseby MSS.; Lingard; Renaud's Letters to Charles V.; Mackintosh; Tytler's Edward and Mary, vol. ii.