Chapter XXI: The Council of the North (2)

On 9 April Berwick Pursuivant arrived at Edinburgh and dined with the Bishop of Aberdeen, who was Treasurer of Scotland. The Bishop made enquiries about the insurrection in England. Ray replied that the realm was never in better order than it was at present. The Treasurer said, “That is very well, but ye have put down many good Christian men.” Ray admitted that they were Christian men, but if they had been good men they would not have been put down,—“I trow, my lord, we are as good Christian men as any in the world.” The Treasurer replied, “Ye that are poor men are good, but the heads are worst; for if ye English men be so good, then is France, Italy and many other countries clearly deceived.” Adam Otterburn, a member of the Scots Council who was dining with them, asked what ships were set on the sea. Ray answered that he knew of none. He gave them the English news according to his instructions. The Treasurer said that he was very glad to hear of so much peace and rejoicing, and that he would pray for the King of England and all the realm, “that ye may be good men.” Ray retorted, “Ye can not, my lord, so soon begin your prayer, but it is had, for we are good already.” He asked why the Scots Borderers were so sure that there would be war when their King came home. The Treasurer merely said that it would not be Scotland’s fault if there were a war.

This humourous hostility, half hidden by a jest, was one sign of the national feeling which watched Henry’s despotism with such jealousy. On his return Ray reported that the commons of Scotland were greatly roused against England, because they believed that English ships had been sent to take their King on his homeward voyage, and that Henry and the Emperor were in league to attack France. If that happened, they said, they would take the French King’s part. They called the English heretics, and were more inclined to war than peace. The new money was paid already, without any rebellion. Lord Maxwell was the only lord who had gone beyond Fife, but for what purpose Ray could not find out. When Ray spoke of the King of England’s power and riches “they say (and in my judgment verily think) they are able to withstand us or any other. And they marvel that my lord of Norfolk lieth in the north parts so long, fearing that his delay and the sailing of the King’s ships means some mischief to them.”[1317]

Ray brought back a letter, dated at Glasgow 11 April, from the Chancellor of Scotland to Norfolk. The Chancellor acknowledged Norfolk’s letter in the name of the Regents. He could scarcely believe that their strict orders against the receipt of fugitives had been disobeyed, but if Norfolk would give them time to make inquiries, anyone found in fault should be sharply punished[1318]. The pursuivant reached Sheriffhutton Castle, where Norfolk had taken up his residence, on 17 April. The Chancellor’s letter and the report were forwarded to Cromwell. Norfolk sent Ray back to Scotland to pick up some more news[1319]. It was generally believed that there would be war. For example, Sir Thomas Clifford, the captain of Berwick, was in London. One of his servants wrote from Berwick to tell him that the Mayor and townsmen begged him to show their needs to the King and the Privy Council, as war appeared to be imminent and they were not prepared for a siege[1320].

The urgent reminders of the Border captains were not unheeded. The King was as anxious as they to secure his frontiers. On 13 April lists were drawn up of the northern fortresses, classified according to whether they required repair or were defensible. Sir George Lawson, the Treasurer of Berwick, received orders to victual the town. On 18 April he wrote to Cromwell to ask for more explicit instructions, and for more money, as he had not nearly so much as Cromwell expected[1321]. Norfolk gave Cumberland similar orders for the victualling of Carlisle, and the Earl sent a similar plaint to headquarters. The country was almost desolated by the recent risings, and food of all sorts was very difficult to procure. At Carlisle there was the old story of lack of guns and men, which he had repeated times out of number[1322].

Norfolk had now taken up his quarters at Sheriffhutton Castle, which he left only to hold assizes or suppress a monastery. He had the chief pledges of Tynedale and Reedsdale in his hands, and hoped by their means to be able to extort restitution from their kinsfolk. He was troubled about the matter, for the honest subjects who had been harried demanded a great deal, and the raiders possessed very little[1323]. The ravages of the Scots did not improve the honest men’s chances of compensation. In April there were several Scots raids on both the East and the West Marches, and Lord Maxwell would not appoint a date for redress. In point of fact both the English and the Scots wardens were convinced that war would break out in a few weeks; and they thought it useless to make appointments that would not be kept and to administer law in a district which might any day be plunged into anarchy[1324].

Lowther’s spies brought him word that James V was expected daily. All the ships on the west coast had gone out to meet him[1325]. In all Scotland the common bruit was that there would be war when the King came home[1326]. Great preparations were made for his reception. He was expected on May Day, for at length the wind was in his favour. Lowther wrote to Cumberland that provision could hardly be made for Carlisle in time, “for either now war of Scotland when the King’s purse is full of the French gold, or never.” He cheerfully added that if corn were sent to Carlisle there was no mill in the castle to grind it, and if they obtained good ordnance, there was no one who could shoot guns. He had sent a spy to Edinburgh to bring news of James’ arrival. This letter was sent on St Mark’s Day, 25 April[1327].

Amid the rising excitement Norfolk was calm. He understood the situation better than the gentlemen of the Marches, who were soldiers, but not statesmen. He knew that peace or war depended on Francis I, and that England was not on such terms with France as to cause immediate alarm. Still, he thought it well to be prepared. He had such good espial in Scotland that no move could be made without his knowledge. Berwick Pursuivant reached Edinburgh on his second mission on 23 April. He carried to the Chancellor another letter which demanded the delivery of English rebels. The Scots Council was heartily tired of these demands. When Ray appeared before them he was asked, “What is the cause ye send your friars to us?” He replied, “We send none, we had liever keep them ourself.”

“If they tarried with you, ye had made martyrs of them.” “Nay,” interposed the Chancellor, “but patriarchs.”

On 25 April Ray waited on the Bishop of Aberdeen to give him Norfolk’s thanks for a present of hawks. In answer to the Bishop’s promise that he would pray that the King and all England might be made good men, Norfolk sent the message that in no country was God better served, and that the Bishop of Rome had no authority out of his own diocese. The Treasurer replied that he felt no grudge towards England for that matter, “but for the cruelness of you that put down your own poor commons.”[1328] Ray brought back to Norfolk a reply from the Chancellor which again promised that the cases which he mentioned should be investigated[1329], and a secret message from the Queen Mother that no lord in Scotland would give the King her son counsel friendly to England[1330].

On 2 May Henry sent a gracious letter of thanks to Norfolk for his services in the north. The King still intended to make a royal progress to York, where he would declare a general pardon, with only a few exceptions. He would see about paying Norfolk’s expenses, though “to be plain with you we think that divers of the gentlemen ... might well have served us better cheap, for some part of a recompense of their former offences.... We do accept in good part the declaration of your opinion touching the Marches. Nevertheless we doubt not but you will both conform your own mind to find out the good of that order which we have therein determined, and cause other by your good mean to perceive the same.” Finally money had been sent for the victualling of Berwick and Carlisle[1331]. Berwick was now in process of being put into a thoroughly defensible condition[1332]. The other Border fortresses were constantly in the King’s mind, and suggestions on the subject were often laid before the Privy Council, but they seem to have had no immediate effect[1333].

At this time Norfolk was vainly petitioning the King for leave to come to court. On 9 May he excused his repeated requests. He explained that his character was being attacked in his absence. He mentioned the rumours that he had encouraged the rebels[1334]. It was said that he had sent for his son, the Earl of Surrey, to instruct him in northern affairs in order that he might presently take his father’s place. Norfolk protested that all these tales were false. He had never encouraged the rebels. He had sent for his son partly because he had hoped the King would give him leave to come south for a short time, and he could not have kept his retinue in the north without Surrey; and partly because “in truth I love him better than all my children, and would have gladly had him here to hunt, shoot, play cards, and entertain my servants, so that they should be less desirous of leave to go home to their wives.” Norfolk besought the King, if he thought him a true man, to allow him to come up and answer his enemies[1335]. He protested that if he had not been on the King’s service not all the Earl of Northumberland’s lands would have kept him so long in the north[1336]. If he stayed much after Michaelmas, he thought it would cost him his life. He had also many private reasons to justify his wish to return to London[1337].

Henry replied on 13 May that he had heard none of the slanders to which Norfolk referred; if he had, he would have mentioned them to the Duke. “You know our nature is too frank to retain any such thing from him that we love and trust.” Norfolk must not credit all the light tales that reached his ears. He could not be spared from the north until after the King’s progress, which would shortly take place. Henry hoped that the Duke would settle all disputes, so that he might not be troubled with petitions. The tone of the King’s letter was friendly, but, though he declared himself assured that Norfolk had not sent for Surrey for “any purpose not to our good contentment,” yet he pointed out that as the Duke had summoned his son without consulting the King, it gave an occasion for people to think evil, which might have been avoided[1338].

In fact Norfolk protested too much about Surrey. The cautious old nobleman believed that he had recovered after his first false step, and was beginning once more to feel his way towards the object of his ambition, the dictatorship of the north. It was the dream of many powerful men to hold the place there which the Percys alone had held. Norfolk had declared that a nobleman must rule there—that this man must have the joint powers of Warden of all the Marches and Lieutenant of the North. Then he held off and suggested that the Earl of Cumberland should have the West Marches and the Earl of Rutland the Middle and East. Norfolk did not suggest anyone to fill the great office his imagination had summoned up; he intimated that it would not become him to suggest the obvious man. In fact all his letters were full of his hatred of the north, and his fear that the climate would be the death of him. “For all the lands the Earl of Northumberland hath and had” he would not tarry there after Michaelmas[1339]. “All the Earl of Northumberland’s land,”—at that time they become a refrain in Norfolk’s letters, the refrain of his ambition. He kept a careful eye on the dying Earl’s extravagances. If the Earl wished to sell wood, Norfolk saved the Percy forests from the axe[1340]. Northumberland was giving away his goods and houses, even the bricks of Wressell Castle, perhaps in a vindictive effort to save something from the King. Norfolk reported this to Cromwell and declared that it must be stopped[1341].

At the same time the Duke suggested that the household stuff of Jervaux and Bridlington, and of Darcy, Sir Robert Constable, and Sir John Bulmer, should be stored in the King’s wardrobe at Sheriffhutton Castle, for the use of the Council of the North, or of any nobleman whom the King might send to those parts. If the goods were sold he said that the King would not receive a third of their value[1342]. This is another sign of the way his thoughts were tending. Later he wrote that Cromwell would marvel if he knew how often Norfolk had been urged by the northern gentlemen to ask for some of Northumberland’s lands and to settle down among them. But he was determined never again to cross the Trent northwards, unless he were with the King, or marching against the King’s enemies[1343].

Clearer hints were never dropped. Norfolk loathed the north,—but if the King made it worth his while, very well worth his while, he was the nobleman who would be lieutenant and warden at once. Henry must have laughed with Cromwell over Norfolk’s palpable ambition. The King had fairly rid himself of the Percys, and he would never put a Howard or any other nobleman in their place. Without a considerable grant of land, Norfolk could not turn to advantage the influence which he thought he possessed in the north; nor was his fear or favour there so great as to enable him to take the Percys’ place, even though he held their lands. He had deceived the northern men, and they were not likely to forget all that they owed to “this false duke.”

The Howards had no ancient connection with the north; their influence began at Flodden and might well have ended at Doncaster, if fate had not been contrary. The Percys had been surrounded by all the splendour of hereditary right and traditional leadership; they had made the north famous, and a hundred tales gave them a place in the hearts of the people. Now the great house was represented by the old Countess who outlived all her sons, and by Sir Thomas Percy’s two little boys. Fallen though it seemed, the house of Howard could not take its place; nor did the White Lion ever put down the Blue. The Dacres might have filled the place of the greatest lords in the north, but after years of true service on the Borders the King and the Clifford feud had left Lord Dacre a ruined man. Henry had little to fear from the Earl of Cumberland, because of his many feuds and the hatred of his own tenants. As to the Earl of Westmorland, he was one of the few noblemen who cared less for place and power than for a quiet life and a safe head. Norfolk was allowed to imagine that he was winning the north for himself when he was really buying service for the King. No doubt Henry thought that the illusion did no harm and might make him work better.

James V of Scotland had at last embarked on his homeward voyage. It was a long and slow one. About six o’clock on the evening of Tuesday 15 May his ships lay at anchor off Scarborough. Norfolk wrote to Cromwell: “If God would have sent such good fortune, that he might have landed in these parts, I would so honestly have handled him that he should have drunk of my wine at Sheriffhutton, and the Queen also, before his return to Scotland.”[1344] There is a sinister ring in the words. Kings of Scotland were not so often guests as prisoners in the King of England’s castles.

If Norfolk had tried the experiment, he might have found unexpected difficulty in taking James. A party went ashore from the King’s fleet to buy victuals in Scarborough, and several boats put out to James’ ship. To one Englishman James said: “Ye Englishmen have let me of my return; an if ye had not been, I had been at home forty days past. But now I am here and will be shortly at home, whoso saith nay.”

A party of twelve English fishermen came to speak with the King of Scots. On coming into his presence, they fell on their knees and “thanked God of his healthful and sound repair, showing how they had long looked for him, and how they were oppressed, slain and murdered, desiring him for God’s sake to come in, and he should have all.” To this pass had Norfolk’s pacification brought the northern men, who had hitherto hated the Scots worse than the devil. James was a good deal troubled by this offer from his uncle’s subjects. He refused to speak to a gentleman who came aboard, lest the man should say the same thing.

Presently the fleet sailed from Scarborough with so light a wind that Norfolk thought they might make Aberdeen, but not the Forth. At Whitburn, near Tynemouth, James cast anchor again, and ten Englishmen came to him with the same complaints, “promising plainly that if the said King of Scots would take upon him to come in all should be his.”[1345] One or two boats went ashore and a party of Frenchmen and Scots landed. With them was an Englishman, James Crane, who was in the service of the French Vice-Admiral. He was really one of Cromwell’s spies, but he probably passed as a refugee. With his companions he met the priest of the parish, and asked what news there was in England. The priest replied, “Ill news, for they kill and hang up men in this country.” Crane seems to have abused the King of England, to lead the unsuspecting priest into further conversation. He asked where the Duke of Norfolk lay, and the priest said either at Sheriffhutton or at York; he added that the Duke dealt so cruelly with the north parts that he wished Norfolk were hanged on one side of a tree and Cromwell on the other. If the King of Scots had come home five months sooner and had entered England, the priest declared that he would have helped to carry him in triumph to London. As they talked by the seaside, he pointed out the lie of the coast: “Lo, here is as good and as ready landing for men as any place in England.”[1346]

On 18 May eleven of James’ ships were sighted from Berwick. They lay becalmed in sight of the town from noon that day until the morning of the 19th. A party from one of the vessels landed at Alnmouth, and the Queen’s gentleman usher rode on to Edinburgh to prepare for the royal reception. Sir Thomas Clifford kept good watch while the King of Scots lay so near, and sent out horsemen during the night to see if any man came ashore[1347]. James must have been moved by the petition of the English fishermen. When his ship drew to the northwards of Berwick, he looked back upon the town and said to the gentlemen in attendance on him, “if he lived one year he should himself break a spear on one Englishman’s breast.”

Berwick Pursuivant was again on mission to Scotland. He saw the King and Queen land at Leith haven at ten o’clock on Whitsun Eve, 19 May 1537. The Vice-Admiral of France and the Bishop of Limoges were the only great men with him. His fleet consisted of ten great ships of France and four Scots ships. On Whit Monday the King and Queen made their entry into Edinburgh “and took their lodging in the Abbey of Holyrood House.”

In Edinburgh Berwick Pursuivant met James Crane, the English spy in the French Vice-Admiral’s service. Crane, seeing by the arms of England “in a box upon his breast” that Ray was an Englishman, took him aside to talk to him. He asked Ray to carry credence to Ralph Sadler “upon a token that when the said Ralph Sadler was in France, he did inquire for the said James at his own house in Rouen.” The credence was an account of the voyage, especially of the two embassies of English fishermen and peasants who had spoken with James. All the French ships were going home, except the _Salamander_, which was a present from Francis to his son-in-law. Crane was obliged to go with his master, though he would have “given £20 on the condition that he might himself come through your Highness’ realm to show further his mind in the premisses.”

Ray reported this to Sir Thomas Clifford at Berwick, and on 26 May the account was sent on to the King[1348]. By this time all the French ships had passed Berwick on their homeward voyage[1349]. Norfolk called Crane’s story “some lies out of Scotland,” and assured Cromwell that it was totally false, for he himself had been at Bridlington the day after James passed, and had examined the only Englishman on the coast who had spoken to the Scots King[1350]. Norfolk was anxious to discredit the report, as he had been insisting for some time past that the north was reduced to perfect obedience and loyalty. Sir John Neville wrote that all the people rejoiced that the King and Cromwell were coming to the north. It was a pity that Richard Cromwell was not there to hear them talk; no men ever repented so sorely as they did[1351].

With his usual prudence Cromwell paid more heed to the foul than the fair reports. In spite of Norfolk’s scepticism Crane was summoned from France, and sent on 20 July to Norfolk at Sheriffhutton[1352]. The Duke still made light of his story, as his geography had been much confused by the long voyage. He described a place which he said lay to the south of Scarborough, but no one could recognise it, and he could not give the names of the “false knaves” who had spoken to James[1353]. To settle the matter Norfolk sent him with a sure, wise and secret gentleman to ride all along the north coast from Flamborough to Tynemouth in order to see if Crane could recognise the place. His description of it was that the church steeple was a sea-mark, that the church was dedicated to St Andrew, and that the vicar was one of the King’s chaplains; it was with his parish priest that Crane had held the seditious conversation. When Crane and his companion came in sight of Whitburn, Crane declared that that was the steeple. On inquiry the wise gentleman learned that the church was dedicated to St Andrew and that the vicar was Dr Marshall, one of the King’s chaplains. Norfolk was obliged to admit that there might be truth in Crane’s story[1354].

Crane could not say where the fishermen lived, and he did not know their names, but he described the leader of the party as a mariner with black hair and a weather-beaten countenance[1355]. The priest of Whitburn, Robert Hodge, was examined by Norfolk and his council. He confessed his words, but declared that Dr Marshall had never spoken sedition and often preached against the Pope[1356]. Norfolk sent Sir Thomas Hilton, the sheriff of Durham, to discover those who had been aboard the French Admiral’s ship, and to arrest the leader of the party, if he had not gone to Shetland for the fishing[1357]. James Crane was given a pardon and leave to return to France[1358]. On 22 September Robert Hodge and two unnamed mariners, one of whom was the leader of the fishermen, were hanged in chains at Newcastle-upon-Tyne[1359].

In order to prevent James’ interviews with the discontented peasants from raising false hopes in Scotland, Henry sent Ralph Sadler as ambassador to James with professions of friendship and instructions to urge the King of Scots to follow his lead by throwing off the Pope and confiscating Church property[1360].

All this while the Duke of Norfolk had been gradually going through an immense amount of law-work. A great many people had been plundered or had lost their goods during the rebellion. Most of them must have been poor men, for little or nothing can be learnt about their wrongs. If any full account of Norfolk’s proceedings for redress remained, it would contain many local details of the Pilgrimage. On 18 May he wrote to Gardiner and Sir Francis Brian, who were on an embassy in France, with some natural self-satisfaction:—

“This country, thanked be God, is, I think, at this hour in as good
obedience as any part of the realm and of such sort that of late at my
coming hither I had not thought possible it should of long time have
been brought to so good pass. There was marvellous spoils at the time
of the insurrection through all these countries and divided in
thousands of men’s hands; and yet such restitution made that at this
day there is very few that is not agreed withal, and the parties
satisfied. It should be a very unreasonable thing that I would command
to be done here that should not be shortly accomplished in all my
Lieutenancy; save only in Tynedale and Reedsdale, of whom I have ten
pledges at Sheriffhutton which lie upon their lives if their country
men do not well. Finally I pray God send us three grace merrily to
meet this winter at London.”[1361]

There are details of two cases of spoil and restitution, but as they both concern rich men, they are probably not characteristic of the rest. The first concerned the plundering of Blythman’s house at York, and has already been described[1362]. The second was the case of Robert Holdsworth, vicar of Halifax; his vicarage was appropriated by the rebels, his goods carried off by his enemies the Tempests, and his hidden pot of gold was found by Thomas Lacy[1363].

During the first week of Lent 1536–7 Thomas Lacy went to confession. He told his ghostly father how he had found the money and asked what he should do with it. The confessor advised him to keep it until after Low Sunday [8 April]. Two or three days after the appointed date, Lacy brought the money to his ghostly father’s room in a canvas pepper poke, and from there carried it to the vicarage, dropped it over the wall into the court, and left it. With an impulse as natural as dishonest, he kept £67 for himself; but presently he repented again and gave it up to Sir Alexander Emmet, Holdsworth’s parish priest. Out of the whole sum Lacy had spent only 26_s._ 6_d._ “about his seeding.”[1364]

The Vicar returned to Halifax from London “after Mid-Lent Sunday” [11 March]. He had been urging his own cause with Cromwell, while Sir Henry Saville petitioned the Duke of Norfolk on his behalf. When he reached home and found the treasure gone, he did not complain to Norfolk and mentioned his loss only to the friends who knew of its hiding-place, Sir Henry Saville, Alexander Emmet, his sister and her son[1365].

While Holdsworth was in London he had obtained writs of attachment against the Lacys and others who had plundered his vicarage. During Easter Week he went to York and begged Norfolk’s favour in the matter. The Duke promised that he should have restitution or the writs should be executed. Holdsworth was still too prudent to mention the great sum that he had lost.

About a week later Alexander Emmet delivered £789. 8_s._ 9_d._ to Holdsworth in gold, simply saying that it came to him in confession. The priest must have been waiting in the vicarage court for the heavy bag that came over the wall[1366].

The matter might have ended there to the satisfaction of everyone concerned, but too many people were in the secret. The Vicar had subpoenas against Lacy and his servants, but they did not appear. Lacy said contemptuously, “If they will have my head they shall fetch it.” He had nicknamed one of his servants Audley and another Cromwell, and said he could not fail to do well having both the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Privy Seal with him. He admitted that he had robbed the Vicar, but he said that the money was treasure-trove; apparently he argued from this that he had as good a right to it as any man[1367]. By this means the rumour of “treasure-trove” reached the ears of the Duke of Norfolk, and he determined that the government should be no loser.

On 12 July Norfolk sent for all the parties to appear before him[1368]. On 20 July the Vicar was a close prisoner, allowed to speak only to those whom Norfolk appointed. The Duke had consulted Chaloner and Babthorpe about the law of treasure-trove, and they agreed that unless the Vicar could prove the money to be his, it was the King’s. Before examining the witnesses Norfolk proposed to send the money to the King, and then, if Holdsworth had too strong a claim to be denied, the Duke would give him licence to sue for its restoration[1369]. It was easy to guess the result of such an application.

The witnesses proved quite conclusively that the money was the Vicar’s, and that he had hidden it himself. There was no evidence that any part of it had ever been treasure-trove. Norfolk’s council believed that the money was really the Vicar’s because there were many crowns of five shillings among the coins found in the pot, and this coin had come into use very recently[1370]. Norfolk was vexed at this turn of the case, and asked Cromwell for instructions. He collected all the Vicar’s money that he could lay hands on and accused Holdsworth of cheating the revenue, “living covetously like a man of £40 promotions,” when he could well spend £200 a year[1371].

On 25 July Sir Henry Saville wrote to Cromwell on the Vicar’s behalf[1372]. Holdsworth brought an action in the Court of Star Chamber against Lacy, but the result is unknown[1373]. It is possible that the government obtained for Holdsworth restitution of his plundered goods, and at the same time robbed him of his fortune, but if this were so, the Vicar was not ruined. On the contrary, he retained too much money for his own safety, as in May 1556 he was murdered by thieves in the night-time in the vicarage house[1374].

Norfolk was empowered to attend to the doctrine of the north as well as its peace. He encouraged the various anti-papal preachers who were sent there, such as Dr Layton and Dr Addison[1375], and suggested that the Archbishop of York and the other principal ecclesiastics might not only promote “such well-learned and also well-willed priests,” but also “find others at their own charges continually to go about and preach.” If this had been done before he thought “no such follies had been attempted as hath been.”[1376]

About the beginning of June Norfolk sent round circulars to all justices of the peace and to the remaining monasteries, forbidding them to give any relief to sturdy vagabonds. He said that the alms of the religious houses had encouraged beggars, and that the justices were slack, but now he intended so to deal with them that Cromwell would probably hear of great numbers coming southward[1377].

On 3 June the good news of the Queen’s pregnancy was confirmed. Norfolk was in York and gave orders for general rejoicings. The Te Deum was sung in the afternoon and at night bonfires were lighted all through the city. To increase the merrymaking Norfolk gave four hogsheads of wine from his own cellar to be broached in different parts of the city for all passers-by.

York was in a ferment of preparation for the King’s visit; the countryside had to prepare lodging and stabling for a large and magnificent company. Two or three hundred extra beds were being made. Fortunately the hay-harvest was good, or it would have been hard to provide for the horses in the royal train[1378]. But all the preparations were in vain. The King changed his mind. It is clear from Norfolk’s letters that he had never really believed that Henry would come, and had been only partly convinced by his repeated assurances. On 12 June the King sent the Duke his reasons for delaying his visit to the north until another year. The reasons were many and ingenious, such as his reluctance to leave the Queen at this critical period, and the delicate state of foreign affairs; but the real motive for delay, which Norfolk was to keep strictly to himself, was the King’s physical condition. His legs were worse, and his physicians advised him not to travel in the heat of the year. As he could not come to pardon the north in person, he would shortly send down “a personage of honour” with a general pardon; Norfolk might announce this. The King graciously said that he could not be better served than he was at present, but as the Duke desired his recall so earnestly, he should soon receive it. The King intended to establish a standing council and desired the Duke’s advice as to its composition[1379].

This was the first explicit statement of the King’s intentions for the future government of the north, but it was so vaguely worded that it did not seriously clash with Norfolk’s ambition. The north might be ruled by a council, but the council might be ruled by the King’s lieutenant. Norfolk was still cautious. In his next letters, dated 16 June, he thanked the King for the promise of release. If his master knew how ill he had been he would not wonder at his desire “to be out of this cold country, where hath been two days this week great frosts in the morning, with the most cold weather that ever I saw in such a time of year.” For the Council of the North he thought the King should either send down a lieutenant or make the Bishop of Durham president; he did not recommend either of the northern earls. For the councillors he recommended Sir Thomas Tempest, Sir Marmaduke Constable, Sir William Evers, Sir Ralph Ellerker, and Sir Brian Hastings. Dr Magnus was growing old and “less able every day.” Norfolk spoke very highly of Babthorpe, Chaloner and Bowes, but they were badly paid. The Duke was heartily glad to hear that the King was sending a pardon to put despair out of “foolish, fearful heads.” He asked that ten or twelve pardons might be sent him, with blank schedules attached, in which he could insert, with the advice of his council, the names of those to be excepted from the pardon[1380].

At this time Border affairs loom large in Cromwell’s memoranda and in the proceedings of the Privy Council, filling the place previously occupied by the northern insurgents. Lists of members proposed for the Council of the North, and of officers and pensioners on the Borders were drawn up, and amended, and drawn up again, until it is hard to say which is merely a “device” and which a final order[1381].

The repairs of Berwick and Sheriffhutton were proceeding as fast as lack of money would allow[1382]. Sir Thomas Clifford was at feud with Lionel Grey, the porter of Berwick[1383]. Norfolk wished the King to have them reconciled, as Grey was a man whom Sir William Evers, the deputy warden of the East Marches, could not spare[1384].

On the Middle Marches Sir Reynold Carnaby had succeeded the murdered Roger Fenwick in the dangerous office of Keeper of Tynedale. Norfolk disliked Carnaby, who was a creature of Cromwell’s, and said sneeringly “that by hearing say he is more than half weary of his being in these parts.” On 26 June Norfolk expected the Council of the Marches to wait on him at Sheriffhutton. He intended to “lay it sore to them” that their country was no stronger against the Scots raiders of Liddesdale, “which weekly doth run upon Carnaby’s offices.”[1385]

The Duke was investigating the circumstances of Roger Fenwick’s murder. The three murderers, John Charleton, Rinian Charleton and John Dod, fled to Scotland and were never captured. Lionel Grey accused Edward Charleton, Cuthbert Charleton, John Heron of Chipchase, George Heron his son and John Heron of the Hall Barns his kinsman, as instigators of the murder[1386]. This accusation was very satisfactory to Norfolk, as the Charletons and Little John Heron of Chipchase were already wanted by the government for their share in the rebellion, but it would be safer and less awkward to punish them nominally for the murder. Little John Heron was captured and sent to London, where he was imprisoned in the Fleet. Heron of the Hall Barns fled to Scotland. George Heron appeared before Norfolk, but he established his innocence so clearly that the Duke wrote to Grey to require proof of the Herons’ guilt[1387]. On 7 July Lionel Grey brought to the Duke “one of the men that hath detected” the part played by the Herons in Fenwick’s murder[1388]. This sounds as if there were other witnesses, but later Jerry Charleton alias Topping is described as “the only accuser of the Herons,”[1389] and his character was so bad that in the end his evidence was discredited[1390]. At present, however, it was considered sufficient, but the Charletons could not be captured by force or stratagem[1391].

Cromwell suggested that John Heron of Chipchase might be sent north to stand his trial for Fenwick’s murder. Norfolk replied on 20 July that he must not be sent north until the time was ripe. If he did not know that he was accused of the murder, he must be led to believe that he would soon be set free. If he had already been charged with it, he must be so closely imprisoned that he could send no word of warning to his son George or his son-in-law Cuthbert Charleton. It was important to lull the suspicions of the Charletons, for it was quite impossible to capture them while they were on the alert. Their own country was almost impenetrable, and if they were attacked with fire and sword they had only to cross the hills to Liddesdale[1392].

On 27 August Norfolk was still hoping to apprehend Edward and Cuthbert Charleton and George Heron. As to Little John Heron, Norfolk directed Cromwell as follows:

“Which John I require your good lordship may be secretly conveyed
hither and so delivered to the officers of my house, to be by them
conveyed to me at Newcastle, to be ordered according to justice. I
would he should be here on 20 September, and conveyed with a hood on
his head, and so secretly kept by the way that no man should know him
unto [_until_] his deliverance; which would also be in the night
because I have many pledges of Tynedale and Reedsdale here. For an it
were known he were here, I should neither take his son nor the others
that I would have. And if it be not known in the Fleet whither he
shall go, but conveyed in the night, the better.”[1393]

On 17 September Norfolk held an assize at Newcastle-upon-Tyne. He made George Heron foreman of the inquest, and the three murderers were condemned in their absence. George Heron did his part, not suspecting that Norfolk, who showed him such a fair countenance, was planning to convict himself and his father of the same crime. George offered to go home to Tynedale and arrest an arrant traitor. Norfolk sent him off with the comment, “If he do I shall have in my hands two false harlots.” The Duke intended to arrest George Heron on his return, and to seize his father’s house, goods and lands for the King’s use. The news from Tynedale was that Cuthbert Charleton was dead[1394].

At the next assizes, on 26 September, John Heron and Edward Charleton were indicted in their absence as accessories to the murder of Roger Fenwick. John Heron had not been sent north, and there was no evidence against George Heron, but nevertheless the latter was arrested and imprisoned[1395]. The Charletons were outlawed, and the Keeper of Tynedale carried on a long guerilla war against them, in which the Charletons, having allies in Scotland, were on the whole successful[1396].

Little John Heron of Chipchase was never sent north with a hood over his face to be hanged. He was called before the Privy Council and convinced the King of his loyalty and worth. In 1539 he rode home in triumph as Constable of Harbottle, with a pension in his pocket[1397]. Edward Charleton was pardoned in 1539; even John Heron of the Hall Barns received mercy and was employed in carrying letters of importance to the north[1398]. At length, in August 1540, Little John Heron was offered the post of Keeper of Tynedale. He refused, unless he were given Reedsdale as well, and he was given both[1399]. Thus he completely superseded his old enemy Sir Reynold Carnaby. Sir Thomas Percy was avenged so far as vengeance lay in Little John Heron’s power. The wily mosstrooper was one of the few men who discovered the length of Henry VIII’s foot.

After this digression it is necessary to return to Norfolk at Sheriffhutton Castle. On 2 July 1537 Sir Cuthbert Radcliff, Thomas Carnaby, Cuthbert Shaftoe and George Heron waited on the Duke, and declared the true state of Northumberland. The raiding was chiefly the work of Liddesdale, reinforced by English outlaws. Norfolk daily expected an answer from the King of Scots to his repeated complaints of the protection which English outlaws received in Scotland. Sir John Widdrington was trying to capture certain Scots thieves in England who would be useful as exchanges. The Northumbrians convinced Norfolk that Tynedale had not done nearly as much harm as was reported, but no restitution had been made as yet[1400].

The West Marches were reorganised about the beginning of July. Sir Thomas Wharton was made deputy warden, in spite of Norfolk’s advice to the contrary. He was also made steward of the abbey of Holm Cultram and the priories of Carlisle and Wetherall. Under him there were four commissioners. Sir Thomas Wentworth became captain of Carlisle, and thirty-three gentlemen of those parts received patents as the King’s pensioners. All these commissions and patents, with the oaths for the different officials, were dated 28 June[1401]. They were first sent to Norfolk, who forwarded them on 3 July to Wentworth, together with a summons to all the gentlemen to meet him at York, where he was going to witness Aske’s execution on 12 July[1402].

Norfolk thought that the arrangements for the West March were better than those for the other two. He wished to call Lord Dacre and Wharton before him and “knit them in amity.” Dacre’s friendship was far more important to the new Warden than that of the Earl of Cumberland, who had little influence with the marchmen. The prickers of Gilsland were always ready at Dacre’s word. Unruly though they were, he kept them in awe, and he was respected even in Tynedale and Reedsdale[1403]. When Dacre was Warden he had been both cruel and partial, sending word to his favourite ill-doers to fly when he intended to make a raid; yet he was very popular among the marchmen.

In spite of his general approbation, Norfolk as usual criticised the King’s appointments[1404]. The Duke constantly endeavoured to draw all the patronage of the north into his own hands. The dictatorship of the north would be within reach if every Border officer were the Duke’s man, and owed his appointment to his master. Norfolk, being on the spot, could often choose better men than the King, who was guided only by report. Nevertheless, so long as the Duke remained in the north, the King would not reverse his decisions. After Norfolk’s departure, the inefficient were replaced by more capable officers, but in the meanwhile he grumbled in vain. The King would not allow him to make any promotions on his own authority.

Norfolk was still urgently petitioning for leave to ride south. He was ailing and described all his symptoms to Cromwell at great length. Cromwell advised him to offer to stay longer in the north; the King had promised that he should come home at Michaelmas. Norfolk replied from Leckonfield on 8 July that if he stayed in the north until the cold weather began he would die. He was ready to serve the King to the death anywhere else; “but undoubtedly if I should know his pleasure to be to command me to remain here, I am sure I should never have one merry day in my life, and would incontinent determine myself for another world.... I may well perceive I have some back friends that thinketh long to hear that I am out of this world.” The north was now in such good order, that he considered there was no need for his presence; a lieutenant with a good council would be enough[1405].

Sir Thomas Tempest, who had been attending on Norfolk, throughout his northern progress[1406], wrote to Cromwell on 10 July. He said that Norfolk had shown him Cromwell’s letter which advised him to remain in the north. To obey would certainly endanger Norfolk’s life during the winter; nevertheless the Duke ought not to be recalled at once, because he was so much loved and feared throughout the north. “Although these parts be now well stayed, their late perversity should be noted, and, as many men of blood and well befriended have justly suffered, it is to be feared their friends are not well contented.” Tempest suggested that Norfolk should stay until the end of October, and then leave a council with a good president to carry on the work until Easter, when the Duke could return for the summer[1407]. Tempest wrote to Bishop Tunstall, who was then in London, to the same effect. Tunstall was the proposed president of the new council. Tempest urged that the Bishop knew well the need there was for Norfolk in the north[1408].

These two letters were obviously inspired by Norfolk, and yet they were very different in effect from his own. Norfolk never wishes to see the north again; yet Tempest suggests that the Duke should return in the spring. Norfolk says that the country is quiet and can do without him; Tempest, that “the country is not so clearly reduced to all goodness that he should be taken from these parts.” All this was the next move in Norfolk’s game. He did not wish to bring the country into such order that the King could do without him. He hoped, on his return to the south, to be followed by a stream of petitions to the King that he might be sent back; even a minor disturbance would not be amiss. If Norfolk could prove to Henry that he was indispensable, he would be in a position to make terms. He had declared that he would not live in the north for all Northumberland’s lands, but the King could test this by experiment. Henry, on the other hand, meant to keep the Duke in the north until it was reduced to order, but not a minute longer. When he did recall Norfolk, he had no intention of sending him back. Norfolk was told that he should be recalled before the cold weather set in. No word was said of a new mission in the spring, but he protested that he was immensely grateful.

The Earl of Wiltshire’s minstrel had composed a song about Norfolk, which he said had received the Duke’s approval. The inference is that the song was in praise of true noble blood and predicted its triumph over upstarts. Norfolk promised Cromwell so to punish the minstrel that he would be afraid to sing such songs again[1409].

Norfolk was impatient for the arrival of a general pardon. He advised that it should not extend beyond 20 February 1536–7. The murder of Fenwick and the welcome of the King of Scots both took place after that date, and consequently those who were involved in either would not be able to claim the benefit of the pardon thus limited. Norfolk sent about fifteen names to be excepted, and asked that room should be left for himself and his council to insert a few more. Those whom he mentioned were: Wilson and Woodmancy of Beverley, Marshall parish clerk of Beswick, Waflin and Leache of Lincolnshire, Bradford and Paris monks of Sawley, Roger Hartlepool monk of Jervaux, Helaigh canon of Coverham, Edward Middleton, Henry King and Simon Marshal of Masham, Each friar of St Robert’s of Knaresborough, Nicholas Musgrave, a friar of Appleby, John Priestman of Lillesdale Hall, John Priestman son of William Priestman of Helnesley [Helmsley?], Dr Marmaduke Walby, Towneley chancellor of the Bishop of Carlisle, and the Prior of the White Friars of Doncaster[1410]. Most of these men had fled to Scotland, but the three last-named were prisoners in the Tower.

In Scotland James pursued an anti-English policy without actually provoking a breach of the peace. Norfolk wrote of him on 3 July “he doth keep so small an house that there is but only six messes of meat allowed in his house, and the Queen his wife not like to escape without death, and that not long unto as I am informed by divers ways.”[1411] The poor young Queen died before 24 July[1412] of consumption, not, as might be supposed from Norfolk’s letter, of starvation.

Sir Thomas Clifford’s spies reported that James “doth not use nor give himself to any princely pleasure, like as he heretofore hath been accustomed, but continually yet doth go about framing his ordnance in most secret wise.” He had paid several midnight visits to Dunbar, and Tantallon was prepared for war. Clifford contrasted with these preparations the destitute condition of Berwick[1413], but as a matter of fact the town was being provisioned and the fortifications repaired.

It was thought possible that James might change his policy on the death of his French wife. It was reported that he was hesitating between a renewal of the matrimonial alliance with France and an application to England for the hand of Mary[1414]. On 2 August James came as far as Dunbar with David Beaton, Abbot of Arbroath, whom he was about to despatch on a diplomatic mission first to Henry and then to Francis. Henry was making a short progress to Ampthill, and intended to receive the ambassador there[1415].

Norfolk prepared to join the King at Ampthill to assist in the negotiations with Scotland, but on 7 August he received definite orders that he was not to leave Yorkshire. He replied with the bitterest complaints of his treatment, and indeed he had a right to expect better usage[1416]. Henry must have felt that he might slight the Duke too much as he tardily consented, and Norfolk joined him at Grafton on 15 August, to give his advice upon the Scots negotiations and on the appointment of the Council of the North[1417]. The Abbot of Arbroath promised that all the English fugitives in Scotland should be exchanged for Scots rebels in England, but his mission did not otherwise give satisfaction, as he was going to France to arrange a new French marriage for James, who was in perfect accord with Francis[1418].

Norfolk and Henry together determined that the president of the Council of the North should be Bishop Tunstall of Durham[1419]. Tunstall was very unwilling to undertake the arduous task. He protested that he was too old to be fit for anything but teaching and preaching. The people hated him, and whatever punishment he inflicted would be imputed to private malice, which would bring discredit on the King’s justice. He was neither powerful enough to punish disobedience nor rich enough to keep up the hospitality which would be expected of him, and this would lead evil-doers to despise and mock the King’s authority[1420]. His objections went for nothing. Henry had decided that he was the most suitable man for the post, and Norfolk probably hoped that Tunstall would prove so complete a failure that he himself would have to be reappointed. Tunstall was ordered to prepare himself and to forget his displeasure against Robert Bowes[1421], who had plundered his palace at Bishop Auckland during the rebellion[1422].