Chapter IV: Part 4

At Trinity Hall, Cambridge, where he completed his education, Gardiner was early distinguished for his talents and his quick parts, especially for his extraordinary skill in Greek, and for the grace with which he spoke and wrote Latin. In process of time he applied himself to the study of Civil and Common Law, and his reputation both as a scholar and a lawyer speedily made him known to some of the famous men of that age.

He was first taken under the protection of a generous and powerful patron, Thomas, Duke of Norfolk, but soon afterwards was brought to the notice, and then received into the household of Cardinal Wolsey, as secretary to that great statesman, then in the zenith of his power. He was thus early initiated into the skilful yet dread policy that for so long a period made the powerful Cardinal the _de facto_ ruler of this country.

A mere accident gained for Gardiner the favour of the King. Wolsey and the Emperor of Austria had been at one time such intimate friends that the latter, when writing (which he did frequently) to the Cardinal, always signed his letters with his own hand, subscribing himself, "Your son and cousin, Charles."

After the battle of Pavia, when the French King was taken prisoner, Wolsey unexpectedly changed sides, and from being a friend of the Emperor's, became a strong partisan of France's. This sudden change of sentiment may possibly have arisen from compassion, but Guiscard suggests another and less worthy motive.

Some months previously, and for some unexplained reason, the Emperor had ceased to write personally to the Cardinal, and only communicated with him through his secretary in the same manner as he did with other persons. According to Guiscard, Wolsey deeply resented this change and lapse of friendship, hence, therefore, his animosity.

Soon after the battle of Pavia, the Cardinal projected a treaty which was to change the aspect of affairs in all civilised Europe, which, indeed, it did. While this treaty was in progress, the King, coming unexpectedly to More Park, in Hertfordshire, found Gardiner busily employed in framing several of the important articles.

Few princes understood business or could transact it better than Henry; he rapidly, therefore, formed a favourable estimate of Gardiner's abilities. Not only did he appreciate the secretary's talents, but he was also pleased by his manner and conversation, and, above all, admired the fertility of invention of which Gardiner had already given convincing proofs. In short, Gardiner was the very man of whom the King at that moment had especial need.

Henry was bent upon obtaining his divorce from Queen Katherine; but though he had obtained many fair promises from Rome, he had failed to induce the then Pontiff, Clement II., to _do_ anything towards advancing his suit. It was in the highest degree expedient, therefore, to send a delegate to Rome who was not only a wary diplomatist, but also a shrewd and skilful lawyer; above all, he must be one in whom the King could fully confide. In Gardiner were found all these essential qualifications, and the King did not hesitate to inform the Cardinal of the favourable impression his secretary had made.

With all his faults, there was nothing mean in the character of Wolsey. He was truly great in this particular, that he feared no man's rise, and grudged to none the reward due to talent. Though overbearing in temper, haughty in manner, tyrannical and revengeful in action, it was yet this noble quality that so strongly attached his adherents to him.

Far from viewing with displeasure the favourable impression made upon the King, he aided his secretary's interests with all his powerful influence; and in February, 1528, Gardiner, together with Dr. Fox, Provost of King's College, Cambridge, left England on a special mission to Rome.

It is evident, from many documents still extant, that the entire confidence, both of the King and of his Minister, had been reposed in Gardiner.

Respecting his conduct in Rome, historians are again at variance as to his motives; but all agree in praising his talents, his dexterity, and his diligence.

Some writers assert that he honestly endeavoured to carry out the King's and the Cardinal's wishes; others, on the contrary, maintain that, in order to secure his own advancement, he betrayed the Cardinal in this embassy, and that for this end he urged forward with the greatest eagerness proceedings which he knew his master in his heart desired might be spun out as lengthily as possible.

However, it must be admitted that such statements are barely compatible with the affection which Wolsey ever entertained for his secretary.

When writing to Gardiner, the Cardinal calls him "the half of himself, than whom none was dearer to him;" and in recommending him to the Pope, he says, when His Holiness hears him speak, it will be as if he heard the Cardinal himself.

At any rate Gardiner spoke boldly at Rome. His diligence and activity also were so great, that between the conflicting interests and exertions of the various Courts of England, France, Spain, and Austria, the unfortunate Pontiff was so pressed and harassed that he fell dangerously ill.

The perplexities of his mind seriously increasing the sufferings of his body, for some time he was like to die, a contingency that offered fresh occasion for the intrigues that were so rife at that period.

Had the Pope died, every effort would have been made to procure for Wolsey the suffrages of the Conclave; and at one time there appeared every probability that he would have succeeded to the Pontifical throne, but Clement recovered, and matters returned to their normal condition.

No sooner did the Pope's health enable him to transact business, than the matter of the English commission was again pressed forward. An extraordinary amount of care and skill were now required, not only to obtain the Pontiff's consent, but to pen the commission in such terms as would satisfy Henry, and dispose the Cardinal Legate Campegio to come to England with a good disposition towards the affair.

At length the important papers were obtained, and Fox at once forwarded them to the King.

The joy with which they were received by Henry, the Cardinal, and Anne Boleyn, was exceedingly great, and their satisfaction was expressed, not only by letters, but also by the valuable presents they made to the successful delegates.

To Gardiner, however, were allotted the greatest honours, for though Fox had nominally been the leading personage of the mission, yet Gardiner had in fact taken the chief part throughout the negotiations; and so impressed was Henry by the talents evinced by his clever agent, that the latter was speedily recalled from Rome, in order to be entrusted with the management of the case before the Legatine Court.

Indeed, so great at this time was the Secretary's influence, that without his advice the King was unwilling to commence his suit. No sooner had Gardiner arrived in England than he was made Archdeacon of Norwich, and soon after, the King took him from Wolsey's service and made him Secretary of State.

The suit had now begun; but whether Wolsey secretly sided with Rome in this matter, or whether he was only suspected by Henry of so doing, the King ere long became furious with his Minister on account of the delays that were for ever occurring to hinder the progress of the divorce.

The Pope's behaviour added much to the difficulties into which he was thrown; and believing that the Cardinal, while apparently aiding, was in reality fomenting the troubles by which he was beset, the King felt convinced that either he was being duped by his Minister, or that his Minister was allowing himself to be egregiously duped by the Court of Rome. In either case, Henry determined to trust Wolsey no longer, and only waited a favourable opportunity to effect his fall.

This opportunity soon presented itself. The successor who was needed was at hand, and again an accident furnished the King with the adviser that he so urgently required.

Dr. Cranmer, a tutor in the family of one Mr. Cressy, of Waltham Cross, was with his pupils at their father's house at Waltham, when the King with his Court passed a night there during one of the Royal progresses.

Drs. Gardiner and Fox were in attendance on His Majesty, and Cranmer had supper with them.

Men's minds were so occupied with the Royal divorce that little else was ever talked of; and the two courtiers, being already well acquainted with the great reputation for learning and solid judgment that Cranmer had gained for himself at Cambridge, sought to obtain his opinion on the matter.

Cranmer modestly declined to give an "opinion," but said that in his poor judgment it appeared to him that, if the marriage were unlawful, it was so by Divine precept; and if that were the case, then the Pope's dispensation could be of no effect either to confirm or annul it, for even the Pope could not make lawful that which God had declared to be unlawful. Instead, therefore, of continuing these long and fruitless negotiations with Rome, it might be better to consult all the learned men, or, indeed, all the Universities of Christendom, and then, according to their finding, the Pope must needs give judgment.

So much impressed were Gardiner and Fox by this advice, that the next day they laid the substance of it before the King.

Some writers say that Gardiner wished to make it appear that the opinion came from him, but that Fox, either from generosity to Cranmer or from spite to Gardiner, took care to mention from whence it was derived.

At any rate, these observations of Cranmer's caused him to be presented to the King, as Henry had at once perceived the importance of the suggestion thus thrown out.

Brilliant talents and an admirable judgment commanded respect, while the candour and uprightness of Cranmer's character secured for him the esteem of all who knew him. His rise in the King's favour was rapid, and honours were showered upon him.

In after times Henry might differ from his Minister, but he knew he need never distrust him. The King often said that the Archbishop of Canterbury (Cranmer) was the only Churchman he had ever known upon whom he could implicitly rely.

Unhappily, the haughty and hasty monarch occasionally succeeded in prevailing upon Cranmer to swerve from the strict line of wisdom and prudence to which his opinions inclined him, but although he yielded in action, the purity of his intentions and the honesty of his purpose were never doubted.

The new adviser's rapid advancement was the signal of Wolsey's fall.

While that powerful Minister was apparently enjoying the plenitude of his greatness, and triumphing in the magnificence of his position, destruction came upon him unawares. Great and brilliant had been his rise, equally great and fatal was his fall.

No sooner was his disgrace resolved upon than the Great Seal was taken from him, his vast possessions were confiscated, he was banished to his house at Asher, and informations were filed against him by the Attorney-General.

Such a tempest of misfortunes broke at once over the head of the unhappy man that his calamities seemed without end, and the ruin of his fortunes was speedily followed by the destruction of his health.

When great men fall, their pseudo friends of prosperous days fall away also. Such friendship but blossoms in the sunshine, it ever withers and dies when clouds obscure their sun.

In this time of cruel adversity, but very few of his many followers remained faithful to the once mighty Cardinal. Of these few the chief was his secretary, Thomas Cromwell, who proved his fidelity not only by his steady adherence to his master, but also by stoutly soliciting the Court in his favour.

As Cromwell's rank did not entitle him to admittance to the King's presence, he was compelled to have recourse to one of the Secretaries of State.

It was to Gardiner that he addressed himself, and it is to that Minister's credit that although, on account of Henry's hasty and tyrannical temper, the task involved considerable risk, the quondam secretary did not desert his old patron and master, but interceded for him with skill, if without much heartiness.

The unhappy Cardinal's letters at this time are most dismal. In one of them, to Thomas Cromwell, he says he has written it "with his rude hand and sorrowful heart," and he signs himself, "T. Carlis. Ebor misserrimus" (the most miserable Thomas, Cardinal of York).

Gardiner at this time was devoting himself to the difficult task of obtaining from the Heads of the Colleges and from the learned men belonging to the University of Cambridge, their declaration in the King's cause, a business that required no small amount of dexterity and artifice.

His efforts were successful. So brilliant an exploit must needs be rewarded, and his rise in the Church was rapid. In the spring of 1531, he was made Archdeacon of Leicester, and in November of the same year he was installed Bishop of Winchester.

"I have often squared" (meaning passed over) "with you, Gardiner," said the King, when he gave his Minister this valuable preferment, "but I love you never the worse, as the Bishoprick I now give will convince you."

The newly-made Bishop sat with Dr. Cranmer, then Archbishop of Canterbury, when that prelate declared Queen Katherine's marriage with the King to be null and void, May 23rd, 1533. He was then sent to Marseilles to intimate to the Pope and the French King, that in case difficulties should be made respecting the divorce, the King of England would appeal to a General Council.

On his return home he was called upon, together with all the other Bishops, to acknowledge Henry as Supreme Head of the Church; and his pen was henceforth constantly employed in vindicating Henry's proceedings, both respecting that monarch's divorce and subsequent marriage, and also with regard to his having thrown off the dominion of the See of Rome.

Gardiner's writings on these difficult subjects obtained for him at the time the highest reputation.

During this period of religious agitation, a strange spirit prevailed amongst all classes of people, of whatever denomination of religion they might be.

Though all needed tolerance, none would grant it. On the contrary, intolerance and bigotry seemed to rule every man's heart. Even those who, whilst they were themselves undergoing its sufferings, had groaned the loudest under persecution, were, when relieved, equally loud in their opposition to the smallest indulgence being extended to those who differed from them in opinion.

Whichever might be the party in the ascendant, its leaders were urged on to institute persecutions and trials, and to enforce executions whenever a doctrine was started to which they did not agree.

Some writers assert that Gardiner was vindictive and cruel; others, that he was forced tacitly to permit proceedings of which he disapproved, and of which he would willingly have mitigated the severity.

Others again say that the King's love of power, and his desire to show himself as a true son of the Church, although he had assumed her temporal headship, induced him to bear witness to his faith by severe measures, whenever her authority in doctrines was impugned by his subjects.

Certain it is, that now began a series of religious persecutions that cast shame and disgrace upon all who professed the name of Christ.

His holy Church on earth, far from being a tender mother to poor, suffering, and ignorant mortals, became a by-word for cruelty and bigotry, a very Moloch, who desired the sacrifice of her children both by fire and by the sword.

What can men deem are the chief attributes of the Almighty, that to give Him pleasure it is necessary to torture and put to death the children that His dear Son came to save?

It is sickening to read the list of those who suffered for religion's sake during the latter part of Henry's reign, and during the whole of the reign of his daughter, Queen Mary.

A Frenchman writing at this time from England, tells his friend in Latin:

"They have a strange way of managing in England, for those who are for the Pope are hanged, and those who are against him are burnt."

Henry also each year became more tyrannical and overbearing. He brooked neither opposition nor contradiction. His humours were so capricious that even his Ministers were constantly in personal danger, it being impossible to foresee how much involved the King might choose to consider them in the schisms that were being brought to the Royal notice.

Gardiner was certainly once in very considerable peril.

His young kinsman and secretary, Germain Gardiner, having been suspected of denying the King's supremacy, had been tried, condemned, and executed, and Gardiner's enemies sought to implicate the Bishop in his secretary's treasonable opinions.

Those who view Gardiner's character mercifully, urge that in order to secure his own safety and that of his relatives, he was driven into assenting rather than being a party to the numerous cruel executions that now sullied the history of this country.

Gardiner ultimately lost the King's favour, from having drawn up a paper of articles against Queen Katherine Parr.

It appears that, as usual, Henry had conceived some jealous suspicions of his Queen, and had directed the Bishop of Winchester to prepare these statements against her.

This important document having been confided to Chancellor Wriothesley, in order that the Queen should be committed to the Tower, he by accident or design let it drop from his bosom. It was picked up by a friendly hand, and immediately conveyed to the Princess.

Katherine so wrought upon the King's affection, that she not only succeeded in allaying his jealous fears and quieting his suspicions, but she also so excited his resentment against the writer of the accusations against her, that from that day Henry would never again see Gardiner.

It is also believed that this incident was the cause of the Bishop's name not being included in the list of the King's executors.

At one time, so high did Gardiner stand in the King's estimation, that Henry had resolved not only to nominate him as an executor, but also to direct that he should be a member of the Council to whom would be entrusted the executive power during the minority of his son.

Here again, however, is difference of opinion amongst historians, some writers asserting that it was not the animosity of Queen Katherine Parr, but the friendship of the Duke of Norfolk and his family, that proved the ruin of Gardiner's fortunes at this period.

Henry having become jealous of that powerful noble, seized upon every opportunity of humbling his relatives and friends.

But this, as well as most of the events of Gardiner's life, have been related by contemporary writers with such violence of partisanship, that it is difficult to ascertain the truth.

To Gardiner, however, must be assigned the merit that both during the life, and after the death of the King his master, he ever spoke and wrote of him in terms of much deference and respect.

Upon the accession of Edward VI. Archbishop Cranmer laboured earnestly to establish the great work of the Reformation on a firm basis, and was very desirous to obtain Gardiner's assistance, or, at any rate, his concurrence in his plans.

But this wily prelate would neither concur nor disagree with Cranmer's schemes. His ruling maxim had ever been to keep things quiet, and he asserted that this could not be done were any great alterations made either in Church or State.

He agreed in the wisdom with which the Archbishop sought to establish the Reformed religion, and also in his desire to do away with superstitious practices, but he saw grave objections to the innovation being attempted at present.

The King's youth and feeble health, the necessary absence of the Protector Somerset, who was detained in Scotland by military duty, made the future not only doubtful, but gloomy; and Gardiner was of opinion that it would be injudicious to disturb the present Church government.

However, Cranmer carried his point in so far as having a Royal Commission appointed for the purpose of visiting each diocese.

The Bishop of Winchester, notwithstanding his love of peace, opposed this measure, and refused to allow the Commissioners to enter his diocese. For this contumacy he was committed to the Fleet Prison.

His imprisonment there was not severe, the Warden of the Fleet being his friend, neither did it last long, and when released he returned to his diocese, and addressed himself zealously but quietly to his duties there.

This calm, however, was not of long duration, for within the year he was summoned to preach in London on St. Peter Day, and his doctrines so offended the Council that he was sent to the Tower where he remained a prisoner during the remainder of Edward's reign.

After Edward's death, Somerset visited Gardiner in prison with a view of effecting his release.

Gardiner readily expressed his approval of all that had been done to establish the Reformed religion, and promised for the future obedience to Royal authority, but he would not acknowledge that he had been guilty of contumacy in the past. On this point he was immovable, protesting that he was innocent in every respect.

He was brought before the Privy Council, and then three months were given to him for reflection.

When this period had expired, as the Bishop remained in the same sentiments, it was resolved to proceed judicially against him in order to deprive him of the See of Winchester.

He then refused to sign the articles that had been sent him previously, and to which he had in a measure assented, and he vehemently demanded to be tried as to the grounds of his imprisonment.

But the Privy Council refused his prayer, and his bishopric was sequestrated.

All these proceedings were much censured as being contrary to the liberties of Englishmen, and contrary also to all forms of legal procedure. It was thought very hard that a man should be put in prison solely from a complaint having been made against him, and still more hard that after two years' durance, and without further inquiry, articles should be put to him for his signature.

Such actions were quite indefensible upon any constitutional principles.

Archbishop Cranmer greatly deprecated this illegal harshness, for he foresaw the injurious consequences.

Such ill-timed severity would inevitably drive men like Gardiner, Tonstall, and Day, who had already acknowledged the King's supremacy, back to the Church of Rome, and the progress of the Reformation must thereby be sorely hindered.

And so it proved.

During the few remaining years of Edward's life, Gardiner remained in the Tower, a prisoner, and yet not strictly kept, for during this period he wrote many controversial pieces, and several Latin poems, besides putting into verse some of the most beautiful and poetical passages in the books of Ecclesiastes, Wisdom, and Job.

On the 3rd August, 1553, Queen Mary made her solemn entry into the Tower, when Bishop Gardiner, for himself, and also in the name of his fellow prisoners, the Duke of Norfolk, the Duchess of Somerset, Lord Courtney, and others of high rank, delivered a congratulatory speech to Her Majesty, who at its conclusion gave them their liberty.

On August 8th, he, with Archbishop Cranmer, and in the presence of the Queen, performed the obsequies of the late King Edward VI. The young monarch was buried in Westminster Abbey, and the ceremonial was the English funeral service.

The next day Bishop Gardiner again took possession of Winchester House, Southwark, after an imprisonment of rather more than five years. On the 23rd, he was declared Chancellor of England.

On the 1st October he had the honour of crowning the Queen, and on the 5th of the same month he opened the first Parliament of her reign.

He was also again restored to his academical honours, and was re-elected Master of Trinity Hall.

Not only were distinctions and emoluments thus showered upon him, but the esteem that the Queen manifestly had for him, and the confidence she reposed in him, led to his being speedily endowed with an unusually large share of civil as well as ecclesiastical power.

Mary was exceedingly anxious on three points.

The first was to substantiate the legitimacy of her birth by annulling her mother's divorce; the second was to effect the restoration of the old religion in England, and to reconcile this country to Rome; and thirdly, she eagerly desired to obtain the consent of Parliament to her marriage with Prince Philip of Spain.

In all these difficult and important matters Bishop Gardiner aided her with marvellous sagacity and unflagging zeal.

Thus it came to pass that the same man who procured the divorce for the father, obtained for the daughter the reversal of that divorce.

Now it was, in these days of triumph and success, that Gardiner gave evidence of his ambition, and of his time-serving nature. To preserve his ascendency over a weak and obstinate woman, he allowed himself to yield many points of which he disapproved, and then, having begun to swim with the stream, he found himself compelled to go faster and farther than he had intended.

The Spanish match was as distasteful to him as it was to the bulk of the nation, foreseeing, as he did, that it would involve this country in great expense, and that it would not tend to increase either the happiness or the good disposition of the Queen.

Unhappily, Mary had inherited obstinacy and violence of temper from her father, and a jealous and melancholy temperament from her ill-used mother.

All the early years of her life had been overshadowed by misfortune and insult, and she had been taught to believe that her sorrows mostly arose from the sinfulness of the nation in resisting the authority of the Church to which she belonged.

Unattractive in mind as well as in person, she loved a man who cared but little, if at all, for her, who had only consented to the marriage from motives of policy, and whose morose and sullen manners embittered the rare visits he accorded to his wife.

However great were Gardiner's errors, not only as a religious bigot, but as an unscrupulous and ambitious statesman, it must be remembered to his credit, that he was ever zealous in preserving what he deemed the constitution of his country, especially so in guarding her from the encroachments of foreigners.

To preserve his own power, he yielded against his judgment to the Queen's desire for her marriage with Philip of Spain, but in drawing up the articles of the marriage contract he took care so to frame them, that they would not only be passed easily by the English Parliament, but also that the Spaniards should be entirely excluded from any share in the Government of England.

To Philip was granted the "Title" of King of England, and his likeness was to be united to that of the Queen upon every coin and seal, but Mary's signature alone sufficed to give authority to all deeds and acts.

No Spaniard could hold office in this country.

The Queen could not be obliged to leave England, nor any child, should there be children, without the consent of Parliament.

The Queen was to have a jointure of £40,000 a year from Spain, and £20,000 from the Netherlands. Should the Queen have only daughters, they were to succeed to her throne, and have from Spain the usual portions of kings' daughters.

Should Philip survive the Queen, he was to have no share in the English Government.

Such stringent conditions appeared very disadvantageous to Spain; but so great was Philip's desire to obtain a foothold in England, that he yielded every point, believing, probably, that when once firmly established in this country, his own influence, combined with the power of the Church of Rome, would overcome much opposition and enable him to gain important concessions.

Parliament passed the Bill, and all obstacles to the marriage being now removed, King Philip, attended and accompanied by a magnificent suite of nobles, and escorted by a large fleet, put to sea, and arrived at Southampton at the end of July, 1554.

From thence he proceeded to the Palace at Winchester, where he was magnificently entertained by the Bishop. The following day he was solemnly married to the Queen by that prelate in the Cathedral of Winchester.

The newly-married pair made their entry into London with every circumstance of pomp and splendour.

At Windsor the King was installed a Knight of the Garter, and whenever he and the Queen appeared in public they were received by the people with universal acclamation.

But this pleasant and joyful state of things was not to be of long duration.

Philip speedily gave evidence of the distaste he felt for his bride, who, poor woman, had not only the misfortune of having an unlovely and unlovable countenance, but was also afflicted with a peevish and jealous temper. She was well aware how little attractive she was, and therefore suspected and disliked every woman who approached her. Her half-sister and heir, Elizabeth, was especially the object of her jealous fears.

This Princess, however, behaved with so much prudence and fortitude that she gave no loophole for the attacks of her enemies. Still, despite her care and prudence, and through the machinations of Gardiner and Cardinal Pole, she was sent to the Tower; but she was saved from perhaps a worse fate by her brother-in-law, Philip of Spain, who interceded in her behalf.

There is much reason to believe that of the two Philip much preferred the younger sister, and as Queen Mary was in bad health and her life most precarious, he hoped to marry Elizabeth after his wife's death.

The unhappy Queen, in the bitter disappointment occasioned by her marriage, again turned to her Church for consolation, and in spite of the King's and the Chancellor's opposition, insisted upon Cardinal Pole's coming to England, armed with a license under the Queen's Great Seal to exercise his functions as the Pope's Legate.

Soon after Pole's arrival, the Houses of Lords and Commons presented a petition to the King and Queen, praying that the nation might again be received into the bosom of the Catholic Church.

The Cardinal, after a lengthy oration, granted the petition, absolving the people of England, and declaring them reconciled to the See of Rome.

But the joy attendant on this proclamation was speedily troubled by the revival of the sanguinary laws for the repression of what was now called heresy.

These laws were speedily carried into execution with much rigour, and a bloody persecution was set on foot in almost all parts of the kingdom.

Whether this persecution was actively concurred in, or only passively submitted to by the Bishop of Winchester, is a matter of doubt. On one side he ever showed himself of the popular opinion by siding with Cardinal Pole when they sat together on various commissions. On the other hand, he saved the lives of many Protestants by merely locking them up until quieter and more peaceable days should come.

These were indeed dismal and dreadful times. A frightful religious zeal prevailed in the minds of men, inducing them, under colour of promoting the Gospel, to act precisely contrary to its spirit.

Gardiner, no doubt, had his share, and a large one, in these barbarous proceedings; but the whole reproach of these savage cruelties must not rest upon his memory.

It is certain that when there were hopes of an heir to the throne, the Chancellor induced the Queen to restore several prisoners to liberty. He went in person to the Tower on January 18th, 1555, and released the Archbishop of York, Sir Edward Rogers, Sir James Crofts, Sir Nicholas Throckmorton, Sir Edward Warner, Sir George Harper, Sir William Saintlow, Sir Gawin Carew, Sir Andrew Dudley, William Gibs, Cuthbert Vaughan, John Harrington, John Tremain, and others of less note.

It must not be forgotten, also, that during Mary's second Parliament, far from advocating the stringent laws that were in course of preparation against heretics, as persons of the Reformed religion were now called, he endeavoured to mitigate their severity; but in this, as in other matters, he was borne on by the stream of Royal and popular opinion, and, perhaps, compelled to acquiesce in proceedings of which he disapproved.

Thus Henry's severities and injustice were now emulated and surpassed by Mary's severities and cruelty.

If Gardiner disapproved in his heart of the persecution of heretics, his clemency or merciful inclinations did but little or nothing towards diminishing the frightful number of blazing piles that day by day consumed the bodies of miserable victims of religious fury.

Tortured by jealous love, unblessed with children, the unhappy Mary turned with increased fervour to religion as her only solace. Convinced, as she was, that the Church alone could afford relief to her sorrows, the bigotry of her nature and education demanded the holocaust of thousands of victims to appease the anger of an offended Deity.

Violent and obstinate, her Ministers, even had they wished to oppose her, could not, without peril to themselves, have resisted her stubborn resolution to have her way.

Unhappily then for England, her Ministers were both yielding and unscrupulous.

Not only was the Queen relentless in her resolve to exterminate heresy, but if the Bishop of Winchester relaxed in zeal, Bishop Bonner, and William, Marquis of Winchester (who for a time held the Great Seal), were eager to show their love for their Church by the torture they inflicted on her enemies.

Gardiner, whatever may have been his personal wishes, also yielded to the pressure put upon him; and by his dexterity and brilliant talents made himself of inestimable value to the Queen, and by so doing secured for himself supremacy in the Council, and also kept away other pretendants, especially Cardinal Pole, who was a formidable rival.

But if, as the writers who view him favourably assert, the Bishop of Winchester was thus impelled by the temper of his Royal mistress, and by a series of circumstances beyond his control, to acquiesce in actions of which he disapproved, what must be thought of the conscience of a man, who as statesman and Churchman permitted tortures to be inflicted, and executions to take place, that have made the reign of Mary a by-word of bloodshed and cruelty, and have covered the memories of this monarch and her Ministers with indelible disgrace?

The land was deluged in blood. The smoke of burning human beings darkened the air, as it rose in hideous sacrifice to the Almighty Father, and the shrieks of tortured victims, the prayers of martyrs at the stake, ascended daily to heaven in one great agonised cry for mercy--and for vengeance.

For a time England seemed as one stunned by the frequency of such unusual and horrible spectacles, but by degrees the mighty spirit of the nation was roused.

Laymen and Churchmen alike shook off their lethargy. The degrading cruelties of the reign of Catholic Mary placed Protestant Elizabeth more firmly on the throne; and when James II. struggled vainly to restore his Church to England, it was doubtless the remembrance of such scenes that induced many staunch Englishmen to welcome with enthusiasm the advent of the foreign Prince of Orange, and his English wife.

Fox, who describes Gardiner as a monster delighting in torture and blood, declares that the Bishop was stricken down by dreadful and deadly disease, the very day on which he had consigned Bishops Latimer and Ridley to the flames at Oxford.

This historian relates that the Duke of Norfolk came to sup at Winchester House, but that Gardiner would not sit down at table until the messenger from Oxford had arrived to say the sacrifice of the martyrs had been consummated.

As he joyed over the narrative of their sufferings, the hand of Heaven fell heavily upon him, and he died soon afterwards in inexpressible anguish of body and mind.

Other biographers say but little of the malady to which he succumbed, but Fox's account is clearly incorrect in many particulars. The Duke of Norfolk Fox alludes to, had been dead some thirteen months, and Gardiner made a speech in Parliament more than a week after the execution of these Bishops.

It is also a disputed point whether Gardiner really exhibited vindictive eagerness in bringing about the deaths of Latimer and Ridley, or whether, as some say, he endeavoured to save them, straining indeed his authority by offering Latimer a pardon without the knowledge of the Queen or the Council.

Bell, as well as Fox, declares that his death was a judgment brought on him for his cruelty to these martyrs, but Dr. Godwin, Bishop of Hereford, Dr. Fuller, and Archbishop Parker, all ascribe his death to natural causes.

For some years Gardiner had suffered from rheumatic gout, and ultimately consumption of the lungs was joined to his other diseases.

Whatever may have been his bodily ailments, it is agreed by every writer that his latter days were embittered by remorse and mental distress. The consciousness of his many sins of omission and commission pressed heavily on his mind. He constantly averred that having been endowed with much power, he felt that he had turned that power to evil rather than to good.

Some historians suggest that he repented having returned to the Church of Rome. Be this as it may, his opinions respecting the two Churches were such as to-day would be denominated broad.

His sermons were very remarkable, for eloquence, for talent, and also for a peculiar sophistry of argument, by which he could twist every quotation or opinion so as to suit the views he at the moment entertained.

His manner was earnest and noble, his voice impressive, and few could listen unmoved to the fervid accents, and to the brilliant and crafty reasoning by which he advocated the various points of his discourse.

It is evident, by the attachment that was felt for him for upwards of forty years, by some of the greatest statesmen in Europe, that he had the talent of conciliating men's minds and commanding their respect; and in his own diocese he was not only a wise and considerate Bishop, but he was infinitely loved and admired.

He died in Winchester House, London, but he was buried in Winchester Cathedral, close by the high altar.

The funeral was solemnised by an amount of pomp and magnificence rare even in those days, when much outward show was usual in every ceremony.

To conduct the unconscious dead to their last resting-place with every circumstance of lugubrious state and grandeur, was then deemed but fitting expressions of affection and respect on the part of the relatives and mourners.

Amongst the many cruel actions of which the odium has been cast upon Gardiner is the mournful tragedy of Lady Jane Grey. This poor girl was a victim to the political intrigues of an unscrupulous and ambitious party, and she paid by the sacrifice of her life, and that of her husband, Lord Guilford Dudley, for her brief and unwilling reign.

Sir Thomas Wyatt and Sir Peter Carew were the originators of a deep-laid and formidable plot, by which Mary and her sister were to be deprived of their rights of inheritance. They flattered the ambition of the Duke of Suffolk by suggesting that his daughter-in-law should ascend the throne, and thereby succeeded in implicating him and his children so completely in their projects that the heads of all ultimately fell upon the scaffold.

The alarm occasioned to the Queen and her adherents by the discovery of this plot was, no doubt, considerable; but against Gardiner is brought the grave charge of having fomented this panic, rather than having endeavoured to allay it.

But for his influence, the deaths of the principal conspirators, Wyatt and Carew, would have sufficed, and have been deemed a sufficient sacrifice. Many others amongst those who suffered in connection with the attempt might have been spared; but the Bishop is reported to have said:

"We may shake off the leaves and lop the branches, but if we do not utterly destroy the root, the hope of hereticks, we do nothing."

THE CHAPEL.

Amongst the many nooks and corners of this ancient Inn of Gray's, the little chapel must not be forgotten. Within its tranquil precincts all things speak of the past, for little has been changed therein for many generations.

Small and unpretentious as it is, few can enter this tiny place of worship without experiencing some emotion, without giving some thought to the many great and illustrious men--lawyers, Churchmen, and statesmen, now long numbered with the dead--who have knelt here for prayer and praise.

Centuries have elapsed since they have passed away, but their noble deeds and writings are still remembered and cherished.

Happily for England, this great race is not extinct. Some of those who now assemble within these walls have already made for themselves illustrious names--names that will be honoured and revered when they, in the fulness of time, depart; but others come here in sorrow, and perchance remorse, for many a promising but wasted life.

Poor, feeble mortals that we are! How many of us live but to exist; and often, indeed, that existence is but the puerile flutter of a day!

Truly, we are but as the sand upon the sea-shore. The tiny atoms shine, perhaps brilliantly, while the sun looks down upon them; but when clouds darken the sky, their brightness fades and soon is gone. Then a little later comes the rising tide--that overwhelming tide of Time, that sweeps them rapidly away. They are gone, and the place where they dwelt, and perchance glittered, knows them no more. No one asks for them; no one misses them. The sand is again as smooth as when they were there. The atoms around still quiver and shimmer in the sunshine as those now departed did of yore.

Not only from association with the past is the quiet little chapel attractive, but there is something soothing in its very aspect.

The fact that so little change has been made in the building or its arrangements for some hundred years is interesting, and it is touching to see the number of gray-headed men who usually attend the services. The memorials around also speak of those who are gone--the painted glass windows, the decorations, the richly-carved book of the Communion Service, are all gifts from those who dearly loved the old place.

In these days of greatly increased form, it is rare also to find a preacher who appears in the pulpit arrayed in the old black Geneva gown.

This quaintly-fashioned gown is precisely that to which our Puritan forefathers attached so much importance, deeming that it savoured less of Popery than any other raiment, inasmuch as its severe simplicity was as far removed as possible from the more imposing and, in their opinion, gaudy vestments of Rome.

From the pulpit in Gray's Inn Chapel may be heard sermons that stir men's hearts, that enlighten men's minds.

No man can hope to obtain the post of preacher to Gray's Inn, unless he possesses talents that entitle him to be listened to with respect and interest. Therefore, though quiet, though old-fashioned, though unemotional in ceremonies, many who think deeply, and who wish to listen to the words of those who also think deeply, may be found amongst the congregation gathered together in Gray's Inn Chapel.

The present little building stands upon the site of the ancient chapel that received its Royal license from Edward II. in 1314, when John, the son of Reginald de Grey, was authorised to convey thirty acres of land, two acres of meadow, and ten shillings rent, with the appurtenances, in Kentish Town, and in the parish of St. Andrew's, Holborn, to the Prior and Convent of St. Bartholomew's, in Smithfield, and to their successors, to provide a chaplain to perform divine service daily for the repose of the soul of the said John, and for the repose of the souls of his ancestors for ever.

The Prior of St. Bartholomew's, however, instead of providing a chaplain for the service of the chapel, appears, according to the accounts of the rents and payments of that monastery, to have paid the Society of Gray's Inn an annual sum of £7 13s. 4d.

When the monasteries were dissolved, Henry VIII. decreed that the Treasurer and Fellows of this same Society should receive yearly from the King's Highness, during the King's pleasure, the sum of £6 13s. 4d., to be paid in even portions, namely, at the "Feasts of The Natyvytie of Our Lord God, of the Annunciation of Our Blessed Ladye, the Vyrgyne, of the Natyvytie of Seynt John Baptist, and of Seynt Michaell, the Archaungell."

But in 1651, during the time of the Commonwealth, this payment ceased, and has never been revived, though during the reign of Elizabeth the officiating minister received a salary of £4 a year.

By an order of Pension, 15th November, 1598, it was ordered that the "Reader in Divinity" to be chosen, shall be a man unmarried, having no ecclesiastical living other than a Prebend, that he be without the care of souls, and that he shall keep the same place while he continues unmarried.

This order corresponds with an usage formerly existing with regard to the vergers of St. Paul's Cathedral, who, by one of the Cathedral statutes, were to be in a state of celibacy. They had either to relinquish their wives or their office.

According to Dean Milman, this statute declares: "That because having a wife is a troublesome and disturbing affair, and because husbands are apt to study the washes of their wives, or their mistresses, and no man can serve two masters, the vergers are to be either bachelors, or to give up their wives."

Since these times either wives have improved and become less troublesome, or else the vergers have become less subservient to them, for at St. Paul's this rule has been abolished. As regards the Reader of Gray's Inn, it still remains in force.

Unfortunately the chapel is, architecturally speaking, of no importance. It is low and insignificant, and quite unworthy externally of the venerable Inn to which it belongs.

Strype, in his edition of "Stowe," much praises the Hall of Gray's Inn, but laments that the chapel is so small, and wishes the Society would build a new one raised on arches, so that there would be a good dry walk underneath them in rainy weather.

The same writer mentions also a new entrance made into Holborn, where had been erected, he says:

"A fayre Gate and Gatehouse that were great improvements, making a more convenient and honourable passage, whereof this house stood in much neede, as the other entrances were rather posterns than gates."

To the shop beneath this gateway a certain interest is attached from its having been the place of business of Jacob Tonson, the celebrated bookseller, who removed here from Chancery Lane in 1697.

Several of the most ancient buildings were destroyed by fire in 1604, and unhappily also nearly all the earliest records of the Society perished in the same flames.

Subsequently the increasing number of students has necessitated the demolition of many more of the ancient houses, for some details respecting them that still exist, describe these old buildings as being not only dark and ill-convenient, but so deficient in space that the students had frequently to lodge double.

In 1688 the Inn appears to have been divided into three courts, but two of these have been thrown into one large area, called Gray's Inn Square.

This same lamentable fire of 1604 destroyed the greater part of the once valuable library. The present library contains about 13,000 volumes, a large proportion being, of course, works on law. There is also a small but valuable collection of manuscripts in twenty-four volumes, some of which are finely illuminated. They mostly relate to theological subjects, and date from the twelfth to the fifteenth century. One amongst them, Bracton's "De Legibus et Consuetudinibus Angliæ," in folio, written about the end of the thirteenth or beginning of the fourteenth century, was presented to the Society of Gray's Inn in 1635 by John Godbolt, then Reader of the Inn.

ARCHBISHOP LAUD.

Five Archbishops of Canterbury have been connected with Gray's Inn, one of whom was the celebrated Laud, Primate of England in 1633, temp. Charles I.; a man as much loved in domestic and private life for his kindness, charity, and tenderness, as he was feared, and indeed hated, as a Churchman and as a statesman, both on account of the rigid intolerance of his religious opinions, and from the uncompromising tenacity with which he strove to enforce every right to which he considered the Church entitled.

Unhappily, this unbending austerity, far from assisting, did but injure the cause he endeavoured to serve, and his zeal was so ill directed, that it eventually brought his head to the block, and was one great cause of the civil and religious war that for so many years desolated this land.

Animated as he was by the religious fervour of the times, Laud was inflexible in his resolution of forcing upon all men the adoption of principles he believed to be right. Even the fatal examples of previous reigns had not taught him that one of the noblest attributes of Christianity is forbearance. Great as was his pride, stern and severe as were his judgments, yet in many respects the Archbishop was a man to be much respected, even much loved. He considered that his pride as a Churchman was but a fitting attribute of the great position he held as Primate of England. He believed that his duty to the Church demanded of him sternness and severity in dealing with her enemies, and he evinced the heartfelt sincerity of his opinions by giving up his life in support of them.

When the end drew near, Laud nobly testified, by the fortitude and calmness with which he faced death, by the tender thoughtfulness he showed for all around him, that his pride and severity were but for his office, that he himself was, as he had ever been, a humble and sincere Christian.

He has been accused by his enemies of endeavouring to overthrow the Protestant religion; but one of the best pamphlets ever published against Roman Catholic tenets was written by Laud in his answer to Dr. Fisher. His foes also were especially rancorous against him for the attempts he made to introduce wholesome and lawful games on Sundays and holy-days; a proceeding viewed with much disfavour by the strict Puritans of the day, who held that all exercises on the Sabbath, save those of religion, tended to Popery.

Laud also endeavoured to restrain the publication of irreligious and other evil books, by subjecting all publications to the revision of the Star Chamber. This endeavour on the part of the Archbishop caused a storm of indignation, for it was held to be an attempt to subvert the existing laws, and to restrain the liberty of the people. The indiscreet zeal, also, that he displayed in his efforts to introduce into Scotland the Liturgy of the Church of England, made him many enemies in that country.

At length, after many years of energetic but fruitless struggles, his foes prevailed against him; he was committed to the Tower, tried before a committee of the House of Lords, and condemned to death.

He was beheaded on Tower Hill on the 10th of January, 1641, in the seventy-second year of his age.

Charles, it is said, though lamenting the death of his old servant, made no attempt to save the life of one who, though opinionated and mistaken, had served his King with affectionate fidelity.

Archbishop Laud's only sister married Sir John Robinson, afterwards Governor of the Tower in the reign of Charles II., and, if we may believe Pepys, an intimate friend and boon companion of that merry monarch. The descendants of Lady Robinson, namely, Sir George Robinson of Cranford, Northamptonshire, Lord Lyveden, of Farming Woods, Northamptonshire, and John Harvey, of Ickwell-Bury, Bedfordshire, still possess many interesting relics of this famous prelate.

BISHOP JUXON

AND

ARCHBISHOPS SHELDON & WHITGIFT.

Archbishop Dr. William Juxon was Bishop of London when King Charles I. was brought to trial, condemned, and executed.

Throughout the civil wars, Juxon had resided at Fulham, and although his steady adherence and loyalty to the King were well known, the prelate's meek and inoffensive behaviour and his many charitable works had gained him the respect of even the most violent of the Puritan and Republican parties.

When the trial of the Royal martyr commenced, Charles, who early foresaw its result, especially requested the attendance of Bishop Juxon; and the ministrations of this good man and truly Christian divine soothed the unhappy monarch during the terrible hours of his last days on earth.

Juxon was unwearied in his devotion to his Royal master. He attended the unhappy monarch on the scaffold; he received the last commissions, he alone heard the sufferer's last words.

When all was over, the Bishop, at considerable personal risk, took charge of the mortal remains and conveyed them to Windsor. When there, however, in spite of urgent remonstrances and earnest entreaties, he was refused permission by the then Governor, Colonel Whichcote, to perform the final sad offices over the Royal corpse.