Chapter XVI (2)

Of Lord Burghley’s place amongst great statesmen it may be sufficient to say that his gifts and qualities were exactly what were needed by the circumstances of his times. He was called upon to rule in a time of radical change, when vehement partisans on one side and the other were fiercely struggling for the mastery of their opinions. It is precisely in such times as these that the moderate, tactful, cautious man must in the end be called upon to decide between the extremes, and to prevent catastrophe by steering a middle course. This throughout his life was the function of William Cecil. His gifts were not of the highest, for he was not a constructive statesman or a pioneer of great causes. He often stood by and saw injustice done by extreme men on one or the other side rather than lose his influence by appearing to favour the opposite extreme; and, as we have seen in his own words, he was quite ready to carry out as a minister a policy of which as a Councillor he had expressed his disapproval. This may not have been high-minded statesmanship, but at least it enabled him to keep his hand upon the helm, and sooner or later to bring the ship of State back to his course again. He was a man whose objects and ideals were much higher than his methods, because the latter belonged to his own age, whereas the former were based upon broad truths and great principles, which are eternal. But it may safely be asserted that the rectitude of his mind and his great sense of personal dignity would prevent him from adopting any course for which warrant could not be found, either in the law of the land or what he would regard as overpowering national expediency. The first cause he served was that of the State; the second was William Cecil and his house. Through a long life of ceaseless toil and rigid self-control these were the mainsprings of his activity and devotion. If he was austere in a frivolous court, if bribes failed to buy him in an age of universal corruption, if he was cool and judicious amidst general vehemence, it was because the qualities of his mind and his strict self-schooling enabled him to understand that his country might thus be most effectively served, and that it would be unworthy of William Cecil to act otherwise. The gifts which made him a great minister at a period when moderation was the highest statesmanship, would have made him a great judge at any period, and it is in its judicial aspect that the finest qualities of his mind are discovered. It was to the keen casuist who weighed to a scruple every element of a question and saw it on every side; it was to the calm, imperturbable judge, that from the first hour of her reign Elizabeth looked to save her against herself; and whatever may be said of Cecil’s statesmanship in its personal aspect, it had the supreme merit of having kept the great Queen upon the straight path up which she led England from weakness, distraction, and dependence, to unity and strength.

FOOTNOTES

[1] “Sadler State Papers,” vol. i. p. 375.

[2] _Memoires sur les affaires d’Angleterre MS._ Bibliothèque Nationale. Colbert, 35.

[3] Naunton, in _Fragmenta Regalia_, says that he was personally acquainted with the senior branch of Cecil’s family in Herefordshire, which was of no mean antiquity: but he speaks of David Cecil, the statesman’s grandfather, as “being exposed, and sent to the city, as poor gentlemen used to do their sons, became to be a rich man on London Bridge, and purchased (an estate) in Lincolnshire, where this man (_i.e._ Sir William) was born.” Cecil’s enemies in his lifetime, especially Father Persons, spoke of David Cecil as having been an innkeeper at Stamford; but this is very improbable, though he may well have owned inns in the town, of which he was an alderman.

[4] The date of his death in the “journal” at Hatfield is given as 1536, and Collins states it to have happened in 1541, his will being proved in that year.

[5] Peck, _Desiderata Curiosa_.

[6] “Courtships of Queen Elizabeth.”

[7] That Cecil’s father was much displeased at his marriage is seen by a letter from Alford, his steward, at Burghley, after the death of Richard Cecil. Mrs. Cecil, the widow (to whom Burghley belonged), appears to have been an extremely self-willed old lady, and refused to exhibit her husband’s will to her son’s agents. In conversation with one of them, she said she knew that her husband had made a will (besides the one in her possession) touching his goods, when he went to Boulogne (_i.e._ 1544). Alford says: “Thinking this might have been about the time he conceived displeasure against you for your first marriage, I rode off immediately to the attorney who, according to Mrs. Cecil, held it, in order, if possible, to learn the contents of the will in your (Cecil’s) interests” (Alford to Cecil, 9th April 1553; Hatfield Papers).

[8] Perpetual Calendar MS., Hatfield.

[9] _Desiderata Curiosa._ This is confirmed by a letter at Hatfield from Griffin, the Queen’s attorney (27th April 1557), saying, “I am sorry that you never were of Gray’s Inne nor can skill of no lawe,” by which it is clear that Cecil was never called to the bar, and probably never seriously studied law.

[10] _Ibid._

[11] Roger Ascham, writing to Sturmius (August 1550), says: “But there are two English ladies whom I cannot omit to mention.… One is Jane Grey … the other Mildred Cooke, who understands and speaks Greek like English, so that it may be doubted whether she is most happy in the possession of this surpassing degree of knowledge, or in having for her preceptor and father Sir Anthony Cooke, whose singular erudition caused him to be joined with John Cheke in the office of tutor to the King; or finally, in having become the wife of William Cecil, lately appointed Secretary of State: a young man, indeed, but mature in wisdom, and so deeply skilled, both in letters and affairs, and endued with such moderation in the exercise of public offices, that to him would be awarded, by the consenting voice of Englishmen, the fourfold praise attributed to Pericles by his rival Thucydides: ‘To know all that is fitting, to be able to apply what he knows, to be a lover of his country, and superior to money.’”

[12] _Desiderata Curiosa_, and Camden.

[13] State Papers, Dom., 1547-80.

[14] _Ibid._, and Tytler.

[15] December 1547, Lansdowne MSS., 2, 16.

[16] _Diarium Expeditionis Scoticæ._

[17] _Desiderata Curiosa._

[18] This is the assertion made by Nares, but it is very questionably correct, as a letter dated 1st July 1548 from Sir Thomas Smith in Brussels (State Papers, Foreign) is addressed to Mr. Cecil, Master of Requests to the Lord Protector’s Grace, and a similar letter from Fisher at Stamford on the 27th July 1548 bears the same superscripture (State Papers, Dom.).

[19] Harl. MSS., 284.

[20] State Papers, Dom.

[21] State Papers, Dom., and also in Tytler.

[22] State Papers, Dom.

[23] The correspondence will be found in Ellis’s original letters, and State Papers, Dom., and also in Strype’s “Memorials.”

[24] Burnet.

[25] State Papers, Dom.: Northumberland to Cecil, 31st May 1552.

[26] This disposes of the suggestion that Cecil was Secretary of State at this time.

[27] See Correspondence, Lady Mary and the Council. “Foxe’s Acts and Monuments.”

[28] She afterwards became the third wife of Philip II. of Spain, 1560.

[29] State Papers, Dom.: Duchess of Suffolk to Cecil, 2nd October 1550.

[30] Or 1553, according to the Perpetual Calendar at Hatfield.

[31] Hatfield Papers.

[32] State Papers, Foreign.

[33] Hatfield Papers, part i., p. 88.

[34] _Desiderata Curiosa._

[35] King Edward’s Journal, printed in Burnet.

[36] There is, however, a memorandum in the Cotton MSS., Titus B 11, (printed in Ellis’s original letters) which proves that, though Cecil may not have been publicly prominent in the condemnation of Somerset, his acumen and diligence were, as usual, made use of to that end. The document is entirely written by Cecil, and is a list of fifteen questions to be put to Somerset in the Tower, all of them of a leading character and calculated to compromise the prisoner. In Cotton, Vesp. 171, will be found the minutes of the Council which discussed the execution of Somerset. Cecil has written thereon, as if to exonerate himself from all responsibility, that the minutes are in the King’s hand.

[37] State Papers, Dom.

[38] State Papers, Foreign.

[39] _Ibid._

[40] Strype.

[41] King Edward’s Journal (Burnet).

[42] In Sir William Cecil’s handwriting.

“_Question_:—

[Sidenote: 1552 Windsor. 23d Sep., 6ᵒ Ed. VI.]

“1. Whether the K. Mt̅i̅e̅ shall enter into the ayd of the Emperor.

“_Answer._ HE SHALL.

[Sidenote: _a pacto_]

“1. The Kyng is bound by the treaty, and if he will be helped by that treaty he must do the reciproque.

[Sidenote: _a periculo vitando_]

“2. If he do not ayde, the Emperor is like to ruyne and consequently the House of Burgundy come to the French possession, which is perilous to England, and herein the greatness of the French King is dreadfull.

[Sidenote: _Religio Chr̅i̅s̅ana_]

“3. The F. King bringeth the Turke into Chre̅n̅dome and therefore that exploit be stayed.

[Sidenote: _periculum violati pacti_]

“4. If the Emperor for extremitie should agree now with the F. the said perill were dooble grettur. First th’ Emperor’s offence for lacke of ayde. 2. The F. King’s enterprises towards us; and in this peace the bishop of Rome’s devotion towards us.

[Sidenote: _pro Republica et patria_]

“5. Merchants be so evill used that both for the losse of goods and honour some remedy must be sought.

[Sidenote: _pericula consequentia_]

“6. The F. Kynge’s procedings be suspisiose to the realm by breaking and burning of our shippes, which be the old strength of this isle.

“_Answer._ HE SHALL NOT.

[Sidenote: _difficile quasi impossibile_]

“1. The ayde is too chargeable for the cost, and almost impossible to be executed.

[Sidenote: _solitudo in periculis_]

“2. If the Emperor should dye in this confederacy we should be left alone in the warr.

[Sidenote: _amicorum suspitio vitanda_]

“3. It may be the German Protestants might be more offended with this conjunction with the Emperor, doubting their owne cause.

[Sidenote: _sperandum bene ab amicis_]

“4. The amytie with France is to be hooped will amende and continue and the commissioner’s coming may perchance restore.

“COROLLARIUM OF A MEANE WAY.

[Sidenote: _judicium_]

“1. So to helpe the Emperor as we maye also joine with other Christian princes and conspyre against the F. King as a common enemy to chr̅e̅dome.

“REASONS FOR COMMON CONJUNCTION.

[Sidenote: _auxilia communa_]

“1. The cause is common and therefore there will be more parties to it.

[Sidenote: _sumptus vitandi_]

“2. It shall avoyd the chargeable entry into ayde with the Emperor accordyng to the treaties.

[Sidenote: _amicorum copia_]

“3. If the Emperor should dye or breake off, yet it is most likely some of the princes will remayne so as the K. Mā shall not be alone.

[Sidenote: _dignitas causæ_]

“4. This friendship shall much advance the King’s other causes in Chre̅n̅dome.

[Sidenote: _pro fide et religione_]

“5. It shal be more honourable to breake with the F. Kyng for this common quarrel of Chre̅n̅dome.

“REASONS AGAINST THIS CONJUNCTION.

[Sidenote: _inter multos nihil secretum_]

“1. The treaty must be with so many parties that it can nether be spedely nor secretly concluded.

[Sidenote: _amiciæ irritatæ_]

“2. If the matter be revealed and nothing concluded then consider the F. Kyng’s offence, and so may he at his leisure be provoked to practice the like conjunction agaynste England with all the papists.

“The above is in Cecil’s handwriting. To it the young King himself has added in his own boyish hand.

“CONCLUSION.

1. “The treaty to be made wᵗʰ the Emperor and by the Emperor’s meanes wᵗʰ other princes.

“2. The Emperor’s acceptation to be understood before we treat anything against the F. King.”

After long reasoning it was determined to send to Mr. Morysine willing him to declare to the Emperor that “i haveing pitee as al other Christian princes should have on the envasion of Christendome by the Turkes would willingly joine with the Emperor and other states of the Empire if the Emp. could bring it to passe in some league against the Turke and his confederates but not to be knowen by the F. King … Morysine to say he hath no more commission but if the Emperor will send a man to England he shall know more. This was done on intent to get some friends. The reasonings be in my deske.”

[43] _Desiderata Curiosa._

[44] Nares.

[45] State Papers, Dom.

[46] Another remedy was a hedgehog stewed in rose-water.

[47] The office at first entailed considerable expense to him. In his diary there is an entry on 12th April, “Paid the embroiderer for xxxvi. schutchyns for my servants coats at iiˢ each. iiiˡ xiiˢ;” and in a letter (State Papers, Dom.) from Petre to Cecil he tells him that the “fashion of his robes” will be decided when _Garter_ comes to court.

[48] Strype regards the illness as being a diplomatic one, and I am inclined to side with him; but it is only fair to say that Cecil’s old friend Dr. Wotton, Ambassador in France, attributed it to overwork. He writes (State Papers, Foreign), 21st June: “Yow perceive yow must needes moderate your labour, your complexion being not strong ynough to continue as yow begone; and my Lords, I doubt not, will not be so unreasonable as to requyre more of yow than yow be able to do. A good parte of the labour which was wont to lye on the Clerkes of the Counsell’s hands is now turned to yow, whereof I suppose yow may easily disburden yourself. It is better to do so betimes than to repent the not doinge of it after, when it shalle be too late.”

[49] The ceremony took place at Durham House, in the Strand, which had been granted by Somerset as a town residence for the Princess Elizabeth, but which Northumberland had, much to Elizabeth’s indignation, exchanged, without her acquiescence, for Somerset’s unfinished palace in the Strand. In answer to her remonstrances, Northumberland humbly protested that he had no desire to offend her Grace, but he made no alteration in his arrangements.

[50] Strype’s “Annals,” vol. iv. Alford’s deposition was made at Cecil’s request twenty years afterwards, and doubtless echoes what Cecil desired to be said.

[51] This statement also must be taken for what it is worth. It was written in Cecil’s extreme old age—or soon after his death—and of course reflected his own version of affairs. It was natural that after the fall of Jane, and particularly when he was Elizabeth’s minister, he should be anxious to dissociate himself from an act which deprived the Queen of her birthright.

[52] B. M. Lans. MSS., 2, 102.

[53] Notwithstanding this protest, there is in Lansdowne MSS., 1236, No. 15, a draft or copy, _in Cecil’s own handwriting_, of the document referred to, addressed to the Lords-Lieutenant of counties, in which they are begged “to disturbe, repell, and resyste the fayned and untrue clayme of the Lady Mary, basterd daughter of … Henry VIII.” The date of this is the 10th July; but the Duke of Northumberland’s draft of the same letter is endorsed by Cecil, 12th July. This would seem to suggest that at all events Cecil had helped the Duke in the composition of the first draft of the document. On the dorse of Northumberland’s copy (Lansdowne MSS., 3, 34), Cecil has written: “First copy of a l’re to be wrytte from ye Lady Jane … wrytte by ye Duk of Northūblā.” But, as stated above, the date of his own copy is two days earlier.

[54] This interesting document is also printed in Tytler’s “Edward VI. and Mary.”

[55] An early copy of this document is in Harl. MSS., 35, and the original draft or “devise” is in Petyt Papers, Inner Temple Library. See also Strype and Burnet.

[56] “Queen Jane and Queen Mary,” Camden Society.

[57] Harl. MSS., 194. Also Hollingshead and “Queen Jane and Queen Mary.”

[58] Harl. MSS., 353.

[59] It is not quite clear whether Cecil preceded or followed Arundel and Paget in their journey to meet the Queen. It is nearly certain that Cecil started after them. They were certainly present at the proclamation at Baynard’s Castle on the 19th July, whereas Cecil does not appear to have been there. The letter, moreover, written the same morning from the Tower by the Council to Lord Rich, exhorting him to stand firm for Jane (Lansdowne MSS., 3) which Cecil said was written by Cheke, is signed by all the Councillors in London, including Arundel, Paget, Petre, and Cheke, _but not by Cecil_. The letter to Mary from the Council, carried by Arundel and Paget, appears to have borne no signatures (Strype’s “Cranmer”); but the letter to Northumberland shortly afterwards ordering him to obey the Queen bears Cecil’s signature. Probably, therefore, Cecil found some excuse for absenting himself on the critical 19th July, and when Mary’s triumph was assured, signed the denunciation of Northumberland, and at once started to greet the Queen.

[60] 7 Julii Libertatem adeptus sū morte regis et ex misere aulico factus libertas mei juris.

[61] An interesting letter from Northumberland to the Council and Secretaries of State, written during his illness (27th November 1552, State Papers, Foreign) shows how much Cecil and his colleagues distrusted Northumberland’s new departure in foreign policy. The French Ambassador’s secretary had desired audience of the Duke alone, to convey a private message from Henry II. to him. Northumberland knew that this would be resented by the Council, and wrote: “I have availed myself of my sickness to direct the Secretary, who was very importunate, to communicate what he had to say, to one of the Secretaries of State or to the Council. And thus I trust within a while, although I may be thought affectionate to the French, as some have reported me, yet I doubt not this way which I intend to use with them to continue but a little while in their graces, which I never desired in all my life but for the service of my master, as knoweth the Lord.”

[62] Dalby’s letter in Harl. MSS., 353.

[63] Hatfield Papers.

[64] Strype.

[65] In Lansdowne MSS., 2, will be found many letters on these subjects to and from Cecil, showing the deep interest he took in educational matters.

[66] _Ambassades de Noailles_, vol. ii., and Hatfield Papers, part i. 25.

[67] Hatfield Papers, part i., and Haynes.

[68] Hatfield Papers.

[69] Reproduced by Tytler.

[70] Lansdowne MSS., 3.

[71] State Papers, Foreign.

[72] “Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth,” vol. iv. 629.

[73] Lansdowne MSS., 3.

[74] See an account of the pursuit of these exiles in the narrative of John Brett (“Transactions Royal Hist. Soc.,” vol. xi.), and also Foxe’s “Acts and Monuments.”

[75] A few months afterwards his brother-in-law, Sir John Cheke, wrote from abroad (February 1556), evidently in fear that Cecil was going too far in his conformity. “He hoped,” he said, “that he would not suffer his judgment to be corrupted in these evil times by what a multitude of ignorance might approve” (Lansdowne MSS., 3). Cheke’s evil fate fell upon him very shortly, as if in judgment for his own pharisaism. In the same spring he was lured by promise of pardon into Philip’s Flemish dominions with Sir Peter Carew. He was treacherously seized, bound, and kidnapped on board a vessel at Antwerp (much as Dr. Story was in the reign of Elizabeth), brought to England, and lodged in the Tower. Threatened with the stake, he allowed Dr. Feckenham to persuade him to recant. Mary’s Government made him publicly drink the cup of degradation to the dregs, and the unhappy man—pitied by his friends, and betrayed and scoffed at by his enemies—died of a broken heart the following year (September 1557). See Strype’s “Memorials.” Archbishop Parker’s remark, written on the margin of one of Cheke’s recantations, is the most merciful and appropriate to the case, “_Homines Sumus_.”

[76] _Desiderata Curiosa._

[77] _Desiderata Curiosa._

[78] Sir Thomas Cornwallis to Cecil: Hatfield Papers, part i.

[79] Hatfield Papers, part i.

[80] Hatfield Papers, part i.

[81] The powerful Earl of Bedford was a prime favourite of Philip—though afterwards so strong a Protestant—and had been sent to Spain to accompany the Queen’s consort to England. He appears to have been on close terms of friendship with Cecil, who managed his affairs in his absence, and to whom he wrote an interesting account of the great victory of St. Quentin (Hatfield Papers). The friendship of such men as Bedford, Clinton, and Paget would of itself almost account for Cecil’s immunity and favour under Philip and Mary.

[82] State Papers, Dom.

[83] _Ibid._

[84] Cecil seems to have been greatly in request for commissions involving a knowledge of rural dilapidations and the management of landed estates. In March 1557 the Lords of Queen Mary’s Council commissioned him to examine the damage done to Brigstock Park, Northamptonshire, and to place Sir Nicholas Throgmorton there as keeper (Lansdowne MSS., 3). He was also steward of Colly Weston and other manors belonging to Princess Elizabeth.

[85] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth.

[86] Feria had visited Elizabeth at Hatfield a few days before the Queen died, and had then written to Philip: “I am told for certain that Cecil, who was Secretary to King Edward, will be her Secretary also. He is considered to be a prudent, virtuous man, although a heretic.”

[87] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth.

[88] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth.

[89] _Fragmenta Regalia._

[90] Cotton MSS., Titus cx.

[91] A proclamation was issued on the 27th December, that no alterations should be made in the rites and ceremonies of the Church, and that no unauthorised person should preach; but a few days afterwards orders were given that the Litany, Epistle, and Gospel should be read in English, as in the Queen’s chapel, which was done on the following day, 1st January, Sunday (Hayward).

[92] Hayward’s reference to this point would seem to prove that the sermons at Paul’s Cross were discontinued altogether for some months. He says preachers had been warned—in accordance with Cecil’s note—to avoid treating of controversial points, and to the raising of any “dispute touching government eyther for altering or retayning the present form. Hereupon no sermon was preached at Paules Crosse until the Rehearsall sermon was made upon the Sunday after Easter; at which tyme, when the preacher was ready to mount the Pulpit, the keye could not be found; and when by commandment of the Lord Mayor it was opened by the smyth, the place was very filthy and uncleane” (Hayward’s “Annals,” Camden Society).

[93] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth.

[94] Original draft in Cotton MSS., Cal. E. V.

[95] State Papers, Foreign; also printed _in extenso_ in Forbes.

[96] Cotton MSS., Cal. E. V.; printed in Forbes.

[97] It must not be forgotten that Mary Stuart, the young Queen of Scots, was married to Francis, the heir to the French throne, and that the disappearance of Elizabeth from the throne would almost inevitably have meant the complete dominion of both Scotland and England by the French. This would have rendered the position of Spain in the Netherlands untenable, and would have destroyed the Spanish commerce, and the fact explains Philip’s forbearance with Elizabeth in the earlier years of her reign. Both Cecil and the Queen were fully cognisant of the advantage they derived from the situation.

[98] Hatfield Papers, part i. p. 151.

[99] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth.

[100] _Ibid._

[101] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i. p. 11.

[102] Parry had just been made Treasurer of the Household _vice_ Sir Thomas Cheynes.

[103] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[104] The treaty was ratified simultaneously by the French King at Notre Dame, the English special Ambassador being the Lord Chamberlain, Lord Howard of Effingham. The correspondence on, and descriptions of, the ceremonies in France, will be found printed _in extenso_ in Forbes. An account of the festivities in England will be found in Nichols’ “Progresses of Queen Elizabeth,” and in the Calendar of Venetian State Papers.

[105] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[106] Strype.

[107] A great impetus had been given to the building of warships on the accession of Elizabeth, and a programme of naval construction was presented, providing for the building of twenty-eight ships during the ensuing five years; an enormous increase when it is considered that the whole navy when Mary died consisted of only twenty-two sail. The first measure of Elizabeth was to turn a large number of the merchantmen, which had been built under subsidy, into warships. These were probably the ships referred to by Cardinal Lorraine. On the 3rd July, shortly afterwards, the Queen was present at the launch of a fine new warship at Woolwich, which she christened the _Elizabeth_.

[108] State Papers, Foreign; _in extenso_ in Forbes.

[109] See also Throgmorton to Cecil, 1st July. _Ibid._

[110] The Queen to Throgmorton, 17th and 19th July (State Papers, Foreign).

[111] Sadler to Cecil, 16th September 1559 (Sadler Papers, vol. i.).

[112] Printed _in extenso_ in Sadler Papers, vol. i.

[113] Arran travelled as a Frenchman under the name of De Beaufort.

[114] Sadler Papers, vol. i.

[115] The scandalous gossip sent by all the foreign agents in England, especially by Feria and his successor, caused much heart-burning. Challoner had been sent to the Emperor in connection with the Archduke’s match, and in the Imperial court found scandal rife about his mistress and Lord Robert. He writes to Cecil a cautious, confidential letter (6th December 1559), saying that “folks there are broad-mouthed” about it. Of course, he says, it is a false slander; “but a Princess cannot be too wary what countenance of familiar demonstration she maketh more to one than another. No man’s service in the realm is worthy the entertaining with such a tale of obloquy” (Hatfield Papers, part i.).

[116] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[117] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[118] Feria to the Bishop of Aquila, 1st October 1559 (Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.).

[119] The original of the address of the Lords of the Congregation to Elizabeth will be found in the Cotton MSS., Caligula B x. (printed by Burnet). In November the famous William Maitland of Lethington was sent by the Lords to England for the purpose of pressing the cause of the Scottish reformers. He was secretly received by Sir James Crofts in the castle of Berwick, and there, by Cecil’s instructions, Crofts gave him a draft written by Cecil of the best form in which to make his representation to the English Queen and Council. This is a good example of Cecil’s foresight and thoroughness. He knew that Dudley and other French partisans would oppose in the Council the sending of an army to Scotland, and in order to strengthen Maitland’s hands and avoid the introduction of anything upon which his opponent could seize, he himself drafted the address of the Scottish Protestants to the Queen and Council. It is needless to say that Maitland adopted his suggestions. The original Scotch draft is in the Cotton MSS., Caligula B ix., and extracts of it have been printed by Dr. Robertson and Dr. Nares. See also Sadler Papers, vol. i. p. 602.

[120] Sadler State Papers, vol. i.

[121] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i. 121.

[122] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[123] The drafts of De Glajon’s letters to the Duchess of Parma, describing his mission to England, are in B. M. Add. MSS. 28, 173_a_, printed in Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[124] Although I can find no hint of such a thing in De Glajon’s letters to the Duchess of Parma, an entry in Cecil’s diary seems to prove that Philip’s jealousy of France was now so keen as to have led him secretly to approve of the English attack in Scotland. The entry in Cecil’s own hand runs: “April 10, M. de Glason came and joined with the Bishop of Aquila to move the revocation of the army out of Scotland, _but Glason privately to my Lord Admiral and me the Secretary counselled us to the contrary_.” There is in the Record Office (printed _in extenso_ by Forbes) a long Latin document in Cecil’s hand, being his reply or speech to the official representations of De Glajon and the Bishop of Aquila.

[125] The French protest is printed by Forbes.

[126] All in Hatfield Papers, part i.

[127] The “device” proposed by Cecil would appear to have been the clause that if the article relative to the abandonment of the royal arms of England by Mary and her husband was rejected by them, the point was to be submitted to the arbitration of the King of Spain. Cecil’s own draft of the clause is at Hatfield (Papers, part i.). There is no doubt that Cecil was safe in making this condition, as he must have known from his interview with De Glajon what Philip’s real sentiments were.

[128] Cecil was paid during his absence £4 per diem—£252; and for postage with twenty two horses from London to Edinburgh and back, £117.

[129] That this would be the case was foreseen before he started from London in May. Killigrew writes to Throgmorton (in France) on the day before Cecil’s departure, “who (Cecil), for his country’s sake, hath been contented to take the matter in hand. The worst hath been cast of his absens from hence by his frendes, but at length jugged (judged) for the best.… I know none love their country better; I wold the Quene’s Majesty could love it so well” (Throgmorton Papers, _in extenso_ in Forbes).

[130] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[131] The twentieth Earl of Huntingdon (Hastings) was the son of Catharine Pole by the nineteenth Earl. He was consequently the grandson of Henry, Lord Montacute, the eldest of the Poles, and great-great-grandson of George Plantagenet, Duke of Clarence, the younger brother of Edward IV. His claim to the crown could only be made good by the failure or invalidation of those of all the descendants of Henry VII. and Elizabeth of York, daughter of Edward IV.

[132] Hatfield Papers, _in extenso_ in Haynes.

[133] Bedford writes to Throgmorton, 16th March 1561, “Cecil is now more than any other in special credit, and does all” (Foreign Calendar). The Spanish Ambassador says the same.

[134] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i. 177.

[135] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[136] Cecil appears at this time to have satisfied himself that the Queen did not mean to marry Dudley. He writes to Throgmorton, 4th April, saying that the Queen was making the Swedish envoy Guldenstern very welcome. “I see no small declensions from former dealings (_i.e._ with Dudley); at least I find in her Majesty by divers speeches a determination not to marry one of her subjects” (State Papers, Foreign).

[137] Anthony de Bourbon, titular King-Consort of Navarre, husband of Jeanne d’Albret, and father of Henry IV. of France.

[138] Hatfield Papers, part i.

[139] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, i.

[140] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[141] Throgmorton, a zealous Protestant, who was in France, and, of course, not behind the scenes in London, appears to have been seriously alarmed, and to have thought that Cecil was really about to change his religion. He wrote (29th April) almost vehemently exhorting him not to ruin the country by doing so (Foreign Calendar).

[142] When Throgmorton first heard that James Stuart was on his way to France he was in great alarm. He was sure that he would be bought over by Mary and the Catholic party, who intended to obtain for him a Cardinal’s hat. Throgmorton thought that no prominent or powerful Scotsman should come to France for fear of his falling under the influence of the anti-English party. But Cecil saw young Stuart on his way and satisfied himself that he might be trusted; and when Stuart returned to Paris from Rheims on his way home, Throgmorton was almost extravagant in his praise of him, and regarded him as firmly wedded to English interests, as indeed he was. Mary, on the advice of Cardinal Lorraine, refused to ratify the treaty of Edinburgh until she arrived in Scotland; but she consented to hand over the government of her realm to James and his friends until her return. She promised to send after him patents under her great seal constituting him Regent, but this she failed to do. Nevertheless he went back to Scotland with practically a free hand, pending the Queen’s arrival in her realm. (Foreign Calendar.)

[143] Hatfield State Papers, _in extenso_ in Haynes.

[144] For months Throgmorton’s spectre was that Mary might marry Philip’s only son, Don Carlos, which, he pointed out to Cecil, would inevitably ruin England and Protestantism. It may be doubted whether Cardinal Lorraine had reached this point yet; though, as will be told, it was broached later from another quarter. It is more likely that at this time—the early summer of 1561—the Cardinal’s view was to marry his niece to the Archduke Charles, Elizabeth’s former suitor, which would have greatly strengthened the Catholics of Germany and the House of Lorraine. The English Catholics at the same time, at the instigation of the Countess of Lennox, were anxiously advocating a marriage between her son, Lord Darnley, and his cousin, Mary Stuart.

[145] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[146] Hatfield Papers, part i.

[147] Throgmorton to Elizabeth, 26th July, in Cabala.

[148] For Maitland’s interviews with the Queen, see Hayward (Camden Society).

[149] Hatfield Papers, part i.

[150] Lady Margaret, and the Earls of Westmoreland and Northumberland, with the Duke of Norfolk, were summoned to London, whilst the Earl of Arundel was obliged to absent himself from court (November 1561), and the students of the University were in a condition of revolt at the attempt to reform the worship in the college chapels. “The whole place,” said the Mayor of Oxford, “was of the same opinion (_i.e._ Catholic), and there were not three houses in it that were not filled with papists,” “whereat the Council were far from pleased, and told the Mayor to take care not to say such things elsewhere” (Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.).

[151] Quadra to the King, 13th September 1561 (Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth).

[152] The Perpetual Calendar at Hatfield frequently mentions attacks of illness about this time, “fitts of ague,” or gout, fever, and so on.

[153] At first the difficulty of obtaining the new coins caused some inconvenience, and several of Elizabeth’s Councillors were in favour (1562) of a fresh debasement of the coinage. By Cecil’s and Paget’s efforts, however, this was avoided, as it was feared that such a measure would cause disturbance. For the first year or two the demand was so great for the new money that the supply was quite inadequate to the demand, but the people greatly resented the idea of a fresh debasement.

[154] As early as 1555, in the reign of Mary, Cecil had been one of the original promoters and shareholders of the Russia Company, but he always steadily refused to share in privateering.

[155] The expedition and its object had first been suggested to Throgmorton in Paris by an old Portuguese pilot, named Captain Melchior, who had formerly lived for many years on the Sus coast and other parts of West Africa. He had been a pensioner of Francis I. and Henry II., but on the death of the latter, lost his pension. The King of Navarre (Anthony de Bourbon) supported him for a time, and then sent him with his scheme to Throgmorton, who referred him to Cecil. The expedition itself was unsuccessful, but was followed by others under the younger Hawkins, which established a lucrative trade in slaves and produce between Africa, the Spanish Indies, and England. There is an interesting paper in the Record Office, dated 27th May of the following year, 1562, when a Portuguese Ambassador was in England remonstrating against the despatch of a new expedition to Guinea. It is a full description of the coast by Martin Frobisher, who had been for nine months a prisoner of the Portuguese at Elmina. He shows that the Portuguese on the coast exercised no control outside of their forts, and were so detested by the natives that Frobisher and other Englishmen were employed as intermediaries.

[156] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[157] Foreign State Papers.

[158] Foreign State Papers.

[159] Foreign State Papers.

[160] In 1559 Throgmorton speaks of the youth at that period as being of great promise—unfortunately unfulfilled.

[161] Foreign Calendar.

[162] The first war of religion in France.

[163] The massacre of Vassy, which began the civil war, took place on the 1st March 1562.

[164] See Grindall’s long list of recusants in prison, in hiding, and in exile at the end of 1561 (Domestic Calendar).

[165] See Sidney and Throgmorton’s letters to Cecil (Foreign Calendar, May 1562).

[166] Almost every letter from Throgmorton to Cecil at this juncture sounds the note of alarm at the possibility of such a combination. A Portuguese Ambassador had recently been sent to England, once more to remonstrate about the English trade with Guinea (as fruitlessly as in the previous year). He lodged with the Bishop of Aquila at Durham Place, and Throgmorton was confident that the real object of his mission was to perfect the arrangement of a Catholic rising in England in conjunction with Mary Stuart, the Guises, and Philip. The fears, however, were perfectly groundless as yet so far as regarded Philip. He was in no hurry to help the Guises until he had them pledged body and soul, and had crushed reform in his own Netherlands. But of course Cecil was unable to penetrate Philip’s policy so well as we can, with all his most private correspondence before us. It is worthy of mention that D’Antas, the Portuguese Ambassador above referred to, offered Cecil a regular pension from his sovereign if he would look favourably upon his interests. Cecil’s reply is not forthcoming; but the offer cannot have been accepted, for the Secretary never varied in his assertion of the right of English merchants to trade on the West African and Brazilian coasts.

[167] See statements of Borghese Venturini (State Papers, Foreign).

[168] Throgmorton Papers; _in extenso_ in Forbes.

[169] State Papers, Foreign; _in extenso_ in Forbes.

[170] See the examinations in State Papers, Foreign, 1562.

[171] Sir Henry Sidney divulged it to the Bishop.

[172] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[173] Bitter as the Bishop was against Cecil’s policy, which checkmated him on every side, it is only fair to say that he usually speaks of his character with great respect.

[174] Dudley wrote to Throgmorton (May 1562) that the Queen was favourable to Condé and the Huguenots, “but her Majestie seemeth very wareful in too much open show towards them” (State Papers, Foreign).

[175] _In extenso_ in Forbes.

[176] Smith sent a message to Throgmorton (21st November 1562) assuring him that his peace negotiations with the Queen-mother and his friendship with the Cardinal were not sincere, but only to “discover their minds.” It is hardly probable that this was the case; although Smith, as a zealous Protestant, certainly did not anticipate the abandonment of the cause of the reformers. Much less did he intend for England to be thrown over by both sides as she was. In a letter to Cecil (17th December) he relates his indignant remonstrance to the Queen-mother when he heard that the Guisans in Paris had issued a proclamation of war against Queen Elizabeth as an enemy of the faith. (Letters _in extenso_ in Forbes.)

[177] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[178] Cecil had built for himself (1560) a splendid mansion in the Strand, on the site of the present Exeter Hall, the grounds extending back to Covent Garden. It was joined on the west by the Earl of Bedford’s estate, for which in a subsequent generation it was exchanged. Cecil appears to have continued in the possession of his house at Westminster, adjoining Whitehall, no doubt for business purposes.

[179] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[180] Sir Simon D’Ewes’ Journal.

[181] Strype.

[182] The Bishop of Aquila, in giving an account of these measures, says, that it would seem as if they were designed to mimic the Spanish Inquisition.

[183] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[184] The marriage of the unfortunate Lady Catharine Grey with Lord Hertford—the eldest son of Somerset—was contracted secretly, and when the birth of a son made the matter public, the Queen was intensely indignant, and refused to acknowledge the union, both Lord and Lady Hertford being committed to the Tower. Guzman says that Cecil brought about the marriage; but there is no evidence whatever of this. Lord Hertford was in Paris with Cecil’s son, Thomas, when the affair was discovered, and was recalled in haste by the Queen. As soon as Cecil heard of it, he warned his son not to associate with Hertford. Cecil wrote to his friend Smith at the same time, “I pray that God may by this chance give her Majesty a disposition to consider hereof (_i.e._ the succession), that either by her marriage or by some common order we her poor subjects may know where to lean and adventure our lives with content to our consciences.” Greatly to Cecil’s annoyance the question of Catharine’s guilt was referred to him for examination and report. He assured Smith in a letter that he would judge impartially, and he did so; for Parker, the Archbishop, on his report, pronounced against the marriage, but Cecil continued on close terms of intimacy with the Grey family, who all called him cousin (Lady Cecil’s brother married Catharine Grey’s cousin), and certainly favoured Lady Catharine’s claims under the will of Henry VIII. Cecil cautiously did his best to soften the punishment, and finally obtained the removal of both husband and wife from the Tower into private custody. Many letters on the subject from the Greys to Cecil will be found in Lansdowne MSS. 2.

[185] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[186] She was probably correct in this. When Elizabeth saw Maitland in London she suggested Dudley as a suitable husband to Mary; and when the Scotsman hinted that his mistress was not so selfish as to deprive Elizabeth of a person so much cherished by herself, the English Queen, greatly to Maitland’s confusion, hinted at the Earl of Warwick, Dudley’s brother. Maitland cleverly silenced the Queen by suggesting that, as Elizabeth was so much older than Mary, she should marry Dudley first herself, and when she died, leave to the Scottish Queen both her widower and her kingdom.

[187] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[188] Cecil was also much interested in the promotion of mineralogy. A patent was granted in 1563 to a German named Schutz who was skilled in the discovery of calamine and the manufacture of brass therewith. For the working of this patent a company was afterwards formed, Cecil, Bacon, Norfolk, Pembroke, Leicester, and others being shareholders, and a great impetus was given in consequence to the founding of brass cannon. Much encouragement was also given by Cecil at this and later periods to German mineralogists for the working of English mines.

[189] In a letter to the Vice-Chancellor (Dr. Perne) in April 1560, Cecil conveyed the pleasant news of the Queen’s intention to grant a number of prebends and exhibitions to those divinity students that shall be recommended “as fittest to receive the same promotions and exhibitions.” The object of this was to encourage the divinity students to embrace the Protestant form of worship, which they were loth to do. (Harl. MSS., 7037, 265-66).

[190] There is in the Domestic State Papers of 1565 a draft letter of the Council, written by Cecil to the Vice-Chancellor, forbidding and ordering the suppression in Cambridge of all shows, booths, gaming-houses, &c., as being unseemly and dangerous.

[191] Full account of the visit, with the speeches, &c., will be found in Nichol’s “Progresses of Queen Elizabeth.”

[192] The old Bishop of Aquila had died, probably of the plague, in the previous autumn at Langley, near Windsor. He had been succeeded by Don Diego Guzman de Silva.

[193] The official account makes no mention of this. It says only that great preparations had been made to represent Sophocles’ tragedy of Ajax Flagellifer. “But her Highness, as it were, tyred with going about the colleges and hearing disputations, and overwatched with former plays, … could not, as otherwise no doubt she would, … hear the said tragedy, to the great sorrow not only of the players but of the whole University.” If the scene as described by the Spaniard took place, it must have been at the house of Sir Henry Cromwell, the great Oliver’s grandfather, at Hinchinbrook, where the Queen slept on the night of the day she left Cambridge.

[194] The Queen had, however, supped with him at his yet unfinished mansion in London—Cecil House—in 1560, and had there stood godmother to his infant daughter Elizabeth (6th July 1564).

[195] This splendid place, to which further reference will be made, was visited on his first voyage south by James I., who was so enamoured of it that he obtained it from the first Earl of Salisbury, Cecil’s younger son, in exchange for Hatfield. It was at Theobalds that King James died.

[196] The details of, and correspondence with relation to this commercial war, with the various negotiations, and especially those of the conference of Bruges, will be found in the Hatfield Papers, correspondence of the Merchant-Adventurers, Foreign Papers, correspondence of Valentine Dale, Sheres, &c., and in the B. M. Add. MSS., 28,173, correspondence of Dassonleville and other Flemish agents, as well as in Spanish State Papers, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[197] Spanish State Papers, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[198] The book in question was that written by John Hales, Clerk of the Hanaper, in favour of the succession of Lady Catharine Grey and her children. He had been indicted in January 1564 for “presumptuously and contemptuously discussing, both by words and in writing, the question of the succession to the imperial crown of England, in case the Queen should die without issue;” and thenceforward for months interrogatories and depositions with regard to his sayings and doings, and those of Catharine Grey and her husband, Lord Hertford, continued before Cecil without intermission. (The papers in the case are all at Hatfield, and are mostly published _in extenso_ by Haynes.) Hales himself was the scapegoat, and was in the Fleet prison for six months; but in all probability, as Dudley said, Cecil and his brother-in-law, Bacon, had a great share in drawing up the book. Cecil was probably too powerful and useful to touch; but Bacon was reprimanded, and Lord John Grey of Pyrgo, an old friend of Cecil’s, was kept under arrest until his death, a few months later.

[199] Spanish State Papers, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[200] Philip s reply, partly in his own hand, to his Ambassador’s reports of Dudley’s offers is characteristic: “I am pleased to see what Lord Robert says, and will tell you my will on the point. I am much dissatisfied with Cecil, as he is such a heretic; and if you give such encouragement to Robert as will enable him to put his foot on Cecil and turn him out of office, I shall be very glad. But you must do it with such tact and delicacy, that if it fails, none shall know that you had a hand in it” (Spanish State Papers, Elizabeth, vol. i.).

[201] Hatfield Papers, part i.

[202] Spanish State Papers, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[203] This refers to the order issued shortly before, called “Advertisements for the due order of the administration of the Holy Sacrament, and for the apparel of all persons ecclesiastical”; which commenced the bitter “vestments controversy.”

An interesting series of returns from the bishops, of this date (October 1564) is at Hatfield. Their lordships had been directed to make reports of the persons of note in their respective dioceses, classified under the heads of “favourers of true religion,” “adversaries of true religion,” and “neutrals.” To the reports the bishops append their recommendations for reform. The Bishop of Hereford says that all his canons residentiary “ar but dissemblers and rancke papists.” He suggests that all those who will not conform should be expelled; and most of his episcopal brethren advocate even stronger measures than these. Another paper of this time (1564) addressed to Cecil, and printed by Strype in his “Life of Parker,” shows the remarkable diversity of the service in English churches. As will be seen later, Cecil’s attitude on the great vestment question divided him from many of his Protestant friends.

[204] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[205] Memoirs of Sir James Melvil of Hallhill.

[206] Bedford and Maitland subsequently met at Berwick to discuss the proposed match. It suited Mary to pretend some willingness to take Leicester in order to obtain leave for Darnley to come to Scotland. She was probably right in supposing that finally Elizabeth did not mean to allow Leicester to marry the Scottish Queen. Cecil was of the same opinion. Writing to his friend Smith at the end of December 1564 (Lansdowne MSS., 102), he says, “I see her Majesty very desyroose to have my L. of Leicester placed in this high degree to be the Scottish Queen’s husband, but when it cometh to the conditions which are demanded I see her then remiss of her earnestness.”

[207] Melvil’s Memoirs.

[208] Spanish State Papers, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[209] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[210] Humphrey and Sampson, both eminent divines and friends of Cecil, amongst others, stood out. The former, after much hesitation, was forced into obedience; but the latter was dismissed from his deanery of Christ Church (Strype’s “Annals”). The students and masters of Cecil’s own College of St. John gave him as Chancellor much trouble by refusing to wear their surplices and hoods. After much correspondence and remonstrance with them, the Chancellor became really angry, and the students assumed a humbler attitude.

[211] Spanish State Papers, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[212] _Dépêches de De Foix, Bibliothèque Nationale._

[213] Foreign State Papers.

[214] _Dépêches de De Foix, Bibliothèque Nationale._

[215] Castelnau de la Mauvissière was in London in May 1565 on his way to France from Scotland, and gives, in a letter to the Queen-mother, a most entertaining account of a conversation with Elizabeth at a night garden-party given by Leicester in his honour (the letter itself is in a private collection, but is printed in Chéruel’s _Marie Stuart et Catharine de Medici_). She said how much more popular in England Frenchmen were than Spaniards; praised the young King as “the greatest and most virtuous prince on earth.” She asked Castelnau whether he would be vexed if she married the King. “Although she had nothing,” she said, “worthy of so great a match: nothing but a little realm, her goodness and her chastity, on which point at least she could hold her own against any maiden in the world,” and much more to the same effect. Castelnau says he never saw her look so pretty as she did. Catharine took the hint, and her industrious approaches to Smith were largely prompted by Elizabeth’s coquetry to Castelnau on this occasion.

[216] Hatfield Papers, _in extenso_ in Haynes.

[217] Cecil writes to Smith, 3rd June 1565 (Lansdowne MSS., 102). “My Lord of Lecester furdereth the Quene’s Majesty with all good reasons to take one of these great princes, wherein surely perceaving his own course not sperable, he doth honourably and wisely. I see few noblemen devoted to France; but I being _Mancipum Reginæ_, and lackyng witt for to expend so great a matter, will follow with service where hir Majesty will goo before.” This attitude is very characteristic of the writer.

[218] There is an enigmatical entry in Cecil’s journal at this period, August 1565, saying, “The Queene’s Majestie seemed to be much offended with the Earle of Leicester, and so she wrote an obscure sentence in a book at Windsor.” Strype, who has been followed by most other historians, thought that this referred to Leicester’s opposition to the Archduke’s suit. The real reason for the Queen’s squabble with Leicester is given by Guzman (Spanish State Papers, Elizabeth, vol. i.). August 27: “I wrote to your Majesty that the Queen was showing favour to one Heneage, who serves in her chamber. Lord Robert and he have had words, and as a consequence Robert spoke to the Queen about it. She was apparently much annoyed at the conversation.… Heneage at once left the court, and Robert did not see the Queen for three days, until she sent for him. They say now that Heneage will come back at the instance of Lord Robert, to avoid gossip.”

[219] Spanish State Papers, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[220] Harl. MSS., 6990.

[221] Randolph to Cecil, 3rd June. Harl. MSS., 4645.

[222] Spanish Calendar, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[223] The action of the French representatives was extremely perplexing. On the one hand, they offered help to Elizabeth against Scotland, and urged Mary to make terms with Murray; whilst on the other, they continued to intercede with Elizabeth for Lady Margaret and Mary, and conveyed the kindest messages to the Queen and Darnley. (See Randolph’s letters.)